Legal Opinion
Young Soon Oh v. AT & T Corp.
District Court, D. New Jersey
Decided December 10, 1999No. Civil Action 99-2161PublishedCited by 10 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
WALLS, District Judge.
This matter is before the court on the motion by defendant AT & T for judgment on the pleadings to dismiss the complaint pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(c) for failure to state any claim for relief, or alternatively, on the grounds that the Federal Communications Commission (“FCC”) has primary jurisdiction over the case. The defendant’s motion to dismiss Count VI of the complaint is granted; the mo tion to dismiss all other counts is denied. The court instead transfers this action to the FCC for resolution of all matters within its jurisdiction, and orders that all…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Conley v. GibsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
- Hishon v. King & SpaldingSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Sherry J. Oshiver v. Levin, Fishbein, Sedran & BermanCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1994
- MCI Telecommunications Corporation v. Teleconcepts, Incorporated, Defendant/third-Party v. Bell of Pennsylvania, Third-Party Teleconcepts, IncorporatedCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1995
- Miree v. DeKalb CountySupreme Court of the United States · 1977
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Global Crossing Telecommunications, Inc. v. Metrophones Telecommunications, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 2007
- Global Naps, Inc. v. Bell Atlantic-New Jersey, Inc.District Court, D. New Jersey · 2003
- Beattie v. Centurytel, Inc.District Court, E.D. Michigan · 2006
- Himmelman v. MCI Communications Corp.District Court, District of Columbia · 2000
- Law Offices of Curtis v. TRINKO, LLP v. BELL ATLANTIC CORP.District Court, S.D. New York · 2000
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.