Legal Opinion
Conboy v. at & T Corp.
District Court, S.D. New York
Decided February 4, 2000No. 99 Civ. 0360(RJW)PublishedCited by 19 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
WARD, District Judge.
Defendants each move pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6), Fed.R.Civ.P., to dismiss plaintiffs’ Class Action First Amended Complaint (hereinafter “complaint”) for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. For the following reasons, defendants’ motions are granted and the complaint is dismissed.
BACKGROUND
Plaintiffs Edward and Eileen Conboy bring this class action against defendant AT & T Corp. (hereinafter “AT & T”) alleging violations of the Federal Telecommunications Act (hereinafter “Telecommunications Act” or “Act”), 47 U.S.C. §§ 151 et seq., and…
2Cases cited39 opinions
- Conley v. GibsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
- Scheuer v. RhodesSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
- Hishon v. King & SpaldingSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Cort v. AshSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
- Touche Ross & Co. v. RedingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
34 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by19 opinions
- Conboy v. AT & T Corp.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2001
- Fero v. Excellus Health Plain, Inc.District Court, W.D. New York · 2017
- Brush v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.District Court, S.D. Texas · 2012
- Thomas v. Consumer Adjustment Co., Inc.District Court, E.D. Missouri · 2008
- Precision Pay Phones v. Qwest Communications Corp.District Court, N.D. California · 2002
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.