Legal Opinion
Bank Express International v. Kang
District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
Decided January 15, 2003No. CIV.A:02-076PublishedCited by 14 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM
DALZELL, District Judge.
Since defendants in this diversity case have questioned personal jurisdiction and venue over them, we begin with a canvass of pertinent contacts.
Plaintiff Bank Express International (“BEI”) is a Pennsylvania corporation in the business of servicing automated teller machines (“ATM’s”). BEI’s clients enter into long-term service agreements under which BEI monitors the electronic processing of ATM transactions, accepts telephone calls concerning technical difficulties, and arranges for the repair of malfunctioning machines. BEI provides all of these services…
2Cases cited24 opinions
- International Shoe Co. v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1945
- Burger King Corp. v. RudzewiczSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
- World-Wide Volkswagen Corp. v. WoodsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
- Calder v. JonesSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- William Rodger Starnes v. Honorable Matthew F. McGuire Arthur Everett Small, Jr. v. Honorable George L. Hart, JrCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1974
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- D'ONOFRIO v. Il MattinoDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2006
- Keating Fibre International Inc. v. Weyerhaeuser Co.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2006
- TV Azteca, S.A.B. de C.V. v. RuizCourt of Appeals of Texas · 2014
- Nationwide Contractor Audit Service, Inc. v. National Compliance Management Services, Inc.District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · 2008
- Rudolph v. HR Specialist, Inc.District Court, D. Delaware · 2014
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.