Legal Opinion
Stein v. Standard Oil Co. of California
District Court, S.D. New York
Decided February 6, 1929PublishedCited by 12 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
HAZEL, District Judge.
Motion by respondent, Standard Oil Company of California, appearing specially, to vacate service of process.
1. The adjudications drawn to my attention uniformly hold that a libel in personam under the Merchant Marine Act 1929, § 33, amending section 29 of the Act of March 4, 1915 (46 USCA § 688), is limited to an action brought within the district wherein the alleged wrongdoer resides, or wherein his principal office is located. The principal office of respondent is in California, and the mere fact that one of its officers has án office in this district for the…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Tauza v. . Susquehanna Coal Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1917
- Panama Railroad v. JohnsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1924
- People's Tobacco Co. v. American Tobacco Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1918
- W. S. Tyler Co. v. Ludlow-Saylor Wire Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1915
- Zimmers v. Dodge BrothersDistrict Court, N.D. Illinois · 1927
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- Brown v. C. D. Mallory & Co.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1941
- Amtorg Trading Corporation v. Standard Oil Co.District Court, S.D. New York · 1942
- Brown v. C. D. Mallory & Co.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1940
- Bennett v. Standard Oil Co. of New JerseyDistrict Court, D. Maryland · 1940
- Eckert v. Socony Vacuum Oil Co.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1935
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.