Legal Opinion
Williams v. AMF, INC.
District Court, S.D. Ohio
Decided April 23, 1981No. C-3-79-227PublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
DECISION AND ENTRY ON OUTSTANDING MOTIONS; CONFERENCE CALL SET
RICE, District Judge.
The captioned cause came to be heard upon several pending motions, including the motion of the Defendant Leland Electrosystems, Inc. (Leland) seeking an Order of the Court dismissing the Complaint for reason that the Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction, and because no claim is stated for which relief can be granted.
I
Plaintiffs’ cause arises from circumstances surrounding the June, 1978, sale of a manufacturing facility owned by AMF Incorporated, Electrosystems Division (AMF) to Leland, a newly formed and…
2Cases cited22 opinions
- Hickman v. TaylorSupreme Court of the United States · 1947
- Vaca v. SipesSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
- Bell v. HoodSupreme Court of the United States · 1946
- Oppenheimer Fund, Inc. v. SandersSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
- Ford Motor Co. v. HuffmanSupreme Court of the United States · 1953
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Power Motive Corp. v. Mannesmann Demag Corp.District Court, D. Colorado · 1985
- Pollitt v. Mobay Chemical Corp.District Court, S.D. Ohio · 1982
- Adkins v. General Motors Corp.District Court, S.D. Ohio · 1983
- Butler v. McDonnell-Douglas Saudi Arabia Corp.District Court, S.D. Ohio · 1981
- Arroyo v. WheatDistrict Court, D. Nevada · 1984
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.