Legal Opinion
Flag Co. v. Maynard
District Court, N.D. Illinois
Decided July 8, 2005No. 04 C 7984PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
GETTLEMAN, District Judge.
Plaintiff, The Flag Company (“Flag”), filed its first amended complaint 1 under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (“RICO”), 18 U.S.C. § 1962(c) and § 1962(d), alleging that Bill Maynard, Steve Adams, and Ronald Roth-stein 2 conspired to induce Flag to purchase “blast faxing” 3 services through fraudulent interstate wire transmissions. Defendants Maynard and Adams have moved to dismiss Flag’s complaint for lack of personal jurisdiction pursuant to Fed. R.Civ.P. 12(b)(2) and for failure to state a claim pursuant to…
2Cases cited23 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
- Bell v. HoodSupreme Court of the United States · 1946
- Asahi Metal Industry Co. v. Superior Court of Cal., Solano Cty.Supreme Court of the United States · 1987
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Brown Ex Rel. Rhiner v. KerkhoffDistrict Court, S.D. Iowa · 2007
- Kazenercom Too v. Turan Petroleum, Inc.District Court, District of Columbia · 2008
- State Farm General Insurance v. JT's Frames, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2010
- Nada v. United Arab EmiratesDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2026
- Shenzhen Wanfan Technology Co. Ltd. v. Orbital Structures Pty LtdDistrict Court, N.D. Illinois · 2024
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.