Legal Opinion
Chrysler Capital Corp. v. Woehling
District Court, D. Delaware
Decided June 9, 1987No. Civ. A. 86-519-JLLPublishedCited by 18 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION
LATCHUM, Senior District Judge.
Plaintiff Chrysler Capital Corporation (“Chrysler”) instituted this diversity action to recover on a promissory note (“the Note") executed by the defendant Robert J. Woehling (“Woehling”) in favor of Lakeside Drilling Association (“Lakeside”) and endorsed over to Chrysler by Lakeside. (Docket Item [“D.I.”] 1.) Woehling did not answer Chrysler’s complaint, but instead moved to dismiss the complaint for want of personal jurisdiction and proper venue, or in the alternative, to transfer this action to the District of New Jersey to be consolidated…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- International Shoe Co. v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1945
- Insurance Corp. of Ireland v. Compagnie Des Bauxites De GuineeSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
- Continental Grain Co. v. Barge FBL-585Supreme Court of the United States · 1960
- Shutte v. Armco Steel Corp.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1970
- National Equipment Rental, Ltd. v. SzukhentSupreme Court of the United States · 1964
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by18 opinions
- Trout Unlimited v. United States Department of AgricultureDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 1996
- Ricoh Co., Ltd. v. Honeywell, Inc.District Court, D. New Jersey · 1993
- Saleh v. Titan Corp.District Court, S.D. California · 2005
- Resource Ventures, Inc. v. Resources Management International, Inc.District Court, D. Delaware · 1999
- American Telephone & Telegraph Co. v. MCI Communications Corp.District Court, D. New Jersey · 1990
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.