Legal Opinion
Pierson v. Source Perrier, S.A.
District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
Decided March 24, 1994No. Civ. A. 93-5121PublishedCited by 21 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM
GILES, District Judge.
Defendants removed this action from state court, asserting that this court has diversity jurisdiction. Plaintiff now moves for remand. For the reasons stated below, plaintiffs motion will be granted.
I. INTRODUCTION
Plaintiff Daniel Pierson (“Pierson”) filed the instant case in the Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas as a putative class action on behalf of all residents of Pennsylvania who purchased Perrier brand sparkling water for personal, family, or household purposes between February 15,1986 and February 15, 1990. Complaint ¶ 9. 1
■ The complaint…
2Cases cited21 opinions
- Snyder v. HarrisSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
- Zahn v. International Paper Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1973
- Charles E. Abels and Irene C. Abels v. State Farm Fire & Casualty CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1985
- Don Chuy, in No. 77-1412 v. The Philadelphia Eagles Football Club (Sued as "The Philadelphia Eagles"), in No. 77-1411 and the National Football LeagueCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1979
- Jaffee v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1979
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by21 opinions
- Michael G. Gilman v. Bhc Securities, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1997
- Aetna U.S. Healthcare, Inc. v. Hoechst AktiengesellschaftDistrict Court, D. Kansas · 1999
- Visintine v. Saab Auto. ABDistrict Court, E.D. Missouri · 1995
- Aetna U.S. Healthcare, Inc. v. Hoechst AktiengesellschaftDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 1999
- Weinberg v. Sprint Corp.District Court, D. New Jersey · 1996
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.