Legal Opinion
Heinrich v. Goodyear Tire and Rubber Co.
District Court, D. Maryland
Decided February 25, 1982No. Civ. A. M-80-1956PublishedCited by 38 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
JAMES R. MILLER, Jr., District Judge.
The defendant, the Goodyear Tire and Rubber Company (Goodyear), has moved to dismiss certain aspects of the plaintiffs’ amended complaint pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) & (7), Fed.R.Civ.P. 1 The plaintiffs have filed a memorandum opposing Goodyear’s motion, 2 and the court heard argument from counsel on February 5, 1982. For the reasons set out below, Goodyear’s motion to dismiss will be denied.
The plaintiffs in this diversity case are an employee, and his spouse, of the Kelly-Springfield Tire Company (Kelly). Kelly is a wholly-owned…
2Cases cited72 opinions
- Provident Tradesmens Bank & Trust Co. v. PattersonSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
- Glanzer v. . ShepardNew York Court of Appeals · 1922
- Fed. Sec. L. Rep. P 94,975 Michelle K. Tomera, on Behalf of Herself and All Others Similarly Situated v. Arthur T. Galt, Jr.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1975
- Phipps v. General Motors Corp.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 1976
- Kathleen McGinty v. Beranger Volkswagen, Inc.Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1980
67 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by38 opinions
- Ed Freeman and Wife Sharon Freeman, Cross-Appellants v. Northwest Acceptance Corporation, Cross-AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1985
- Dow v. JonesDistrict Court, D. Maryland · 2002
- Artiglio v. Corning Inc.California Supreme Court · 1998
- Bujol v. Entergy Services, Inc.Supreme Court of Louisiana · 2006
- Spinoso v. Heilman (In Re Heilman)United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Maryland · 1999
33 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.