TEXAS

v.

NEW MEXICO ET AL.

Citator

Cited By

• Eichman v. Fotomat Corp., 759 F.2d 1434 (9th Cir. 1985)
  …Inc. v. Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control, 55 Cal.2d 728, 733, 361 P. 2d 712, 715, 13 Cal.Rptr. 104, 107 (1961); Pacific Mutual Life Insurance Co. v. McConnell, 44 Cal.2d 715, 725, 285 P. 2d 636, 641 (1955), appeal dismissed and cert. denied, 350 U.S. 984, 76 S.Ct. 472, 100 L.Ed. 851 (1956). Because federal antitrust claims are within the exclusive jurisdiction of the federal courts, Marrese, — U.S. at-, 105 S.Ct. at 1330, the California court in Eichman I would have had no jurisdiction over Eichman’…
• United States ex rel. Robinson Rancheria Citizens Council v. Borneo, Inc., 971 F.2d 244 (9th Cir. 1992)
  …approving it authorized mutualization of the new company under the wrong statutes, the order is nevertheless res judica-ta. Pacific Mut. Life Ins. Co. v. McConnell, 44 Cal.2d 715, 727-28, 285 P. 2d 636, 642 (1955) (citations omitted), cert, denied, 350 U.S. 984, 76 S.Ct. 472, 100 L.Ed. 851 (1956). What Pacific Mutual hinted at, the California Supreme Court has now made explicit. It has declared that the mere availability of a voidness attack in some instances will not upset the normal rules of res judicat…