HMG/Courtland Properties, Inc. v. Gray
Court of Chancery of Delaware
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
STRINE, Vice Chancellor.
I. Introduction
The plaintiff, HMG/Courtland Properties, Inc. (“HMG”), has filed a motion for leave to file an amended complaint in this action to aver facts which it believes would enable this Court to exercise jurisdiction over NAF Associates (“NAF”) and James Fieber. Several of the defendants, Norman Fieber, NAF and the Jim Fieber Trust (collectively, the “Fieber Defendants”), oppose HMG’s motion on the ground that the amended complaint does not allege a sufficient basis for this court to exercise personal jurisdiction over them. For the same reason, they seek…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Shaffer v. HeitnerSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
- Mellon Bank (East) Psfs, National Association v. Kenneth v. Farino Leslie Trinin Robert Levitas Eileen MichaelsCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1992
- Istituto Bancario Italiano SpA v. Hunter Engineering Co.Supreme Court of Delaware · 1982
- Sternberg v. O'NEILSupreme Court of Delaware · 1988
- In Re USACafes, L.P. LitigationCourt of Chancery of Delaware · 1991
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by27 opinions
- Crescent/Mach I Partners, L.P. v. TurnerCourt of Chancery of Delaware · 2000
- Stifel Financial Corp. v. CochranSupreme Court of Delaware · 2002
- Boilermakers Local 154 Retirement Fund v. Chevron Corp.Court of Chancery of Delaware · 2013
- Hazout v. Tsang Mun TingSupreme Court of Delaware · 2016
- Sample v. MorganCourt of Chancery of Delaware · 2007
22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.