Louis Matteucci v. Paddy Eugene Messersmith

Ninth Circuit

Louis Matteucci v. Paddy Eugene Messersmith

385 F.2d 1023

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

DecidedOctober 30, 1967

Docket21399

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 385 F.2d 1023 (Louis Matteucci v. Paddy Eugene Messersmith) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Louis Matteucci v. Paddy Eugene Messersmith, 385 F.2d 1023 (9th Cir. 1967).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

This is an interlocutory appeal from an order denying appellant’s motion to dismiss for lack of federal jurisdiction, based on alleged diversity of citizenship. It presents a complicated factual situation upon which the trial court concluded there was diversity, and hence jurisdiction.

We approve and confirm the trial court’s finding and order (C.T. 75-79), and on the authorities therein enumerated we affirm. Messersmith v. Matteucci, D.C., 276 F.Supp. 310.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM:

This is an interlocutory appeal from an order denying appellant’s motion to dismiss for lack of federal jurisdiction, based on alleged diversity of citizenship. It presents a complicated factual situation upon which the trial court concluded there was diversity, and hence jurisdiction.

We approve and confirm the trial court’s finding and order (C.T. 75-79), and on the authorities therein enumerated we affirm. Messersmith v. Matteucci, D.C., 276 F.Supp. 310.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

385 F.2d 1023, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/louis-matteucci-v-paddy-eugene-messersmith-ca9-1967.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack