Legal Opinion
In Re the Arbitration of Certain Differences Between Lummus Co. & Commonwealth Oil Refining Co.
District Court, S.D. New York
Decided June 2, 1961PublishedCited by 29 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
WEINFELD, District Judge.
This proceeding was originated in the Supreme Court of the State of New York by The Lummus Company to compel Commonwealth Oil Refining Company, Inc. to arbitrate disputes arising out of two contracts entered into between them, each of which contained an arbitration clause.
Lummus now moves to remand the proceeding to the State Court, 1 from which it had been removed to this Court on the petition of Commonwealth, which alleged diversity of citizenship, 2 based upon the fact that Lummus is a Delaware corporation, with its principal place of business in the State of New…
2Cases cited41 opinions
- Erie Railroad v. TompkinsSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
- Klaxon Co. v. Stentor Electric Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1941
- Guaranty Trust Co. v. YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1945
- Guaranty Trust Co. v. YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1945
- Bernhardt v. Polygraphic Co. of America, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1956
36 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by29 opinions
- Lummus Company v. Commonwealth Oil Refining Company, Inc., Lummus Company v. Honorable Archie O. DawsonCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1962
- Maurice A. Krisel v. Rafael Duran, Sam Van Hining and Phillips Petroleum Company, Andeconomic Development Administration of Puerto RicoCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1967
- Americana of Puerto Rico, Inc. v. Samuel R. Kaplus and J. Kaplus & Sons, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1966
- Krisel v. DuranDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1966
- City of New York v. Pullman Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 1979
24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.