Legal Opinion
Gearhart v. Pulakos
District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania
Decided May 29, 1962No. Civ. A. No. 858PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
WILLSON, District Judge.
In this diversity action the individual defendants have filed a motion under Rule 12(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, 28 U.S.C.A. to quash the service of process on the ground that the court has no jurisdiction over the person of the defendants, and that the service of process is insufficient.
Plaintiffs are citizens of and reside in the City of Erie, Pennsylvania. The individual defendants Peter G. Pulakos and Carolyn P. Pulakos, his wife, are citizens of and reside in Albuquerque, New Mexico.
This civil action arises out of an accident on December 28, 1960…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- International Shoe Co. v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1945
- McGee v. International Life InsuranceSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
- Pennoyer v. NeffSupreme Court of the United States · 1878
- Hess v. PawloskiSupreme Court of the United States · 1927
- Rufo v. the Bastian-Blessing Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1961
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Gurley v. LindsleyCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1972
- Betcher v. Hay-RoeSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1968
- John W. Gurley, Plaintiffs-Appellees-Cross v. Herbert P. Lindsley, Defendants-Appellants-Cross John W. Gurley, Third Party v. Cities Service Oil Company, Third PartyCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1972