Legal Opinion

S.M.W. Seiko v. Howard Concrete

District Court, D. New Hampshire

Decided October 18, 2001No. CV-01-183-JMPublished

1Opinion of the Court

S.M.W. Seiko v . Howard Concrete CV-01-183-JM 10/18/01 P UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE S.M.W. Seiko, Inc. v. Civil N o . 01-183-JM Opinion N o .

2001 DNH 190

Howard Concrete Pumping Co., Inc. O R D E R Before the court for consideration is the defendant’s motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction, improper venue and insufficient service of process pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(2), (3) & ( 5 ) , o r , in the alternative, to transfer venue pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a). For the reasons set forth below, the defendant’s motion (document no. 6 ) is…

2Cases cited19 opinions

Van Dusen v. BarrackSupreme Court of the United States · 1964
Quackenbush v. Allstate InsuranceSupreme Court of the United States · 1996
Granny Goose Foods, Inc. v. Brotherhood of Teamsters & Auto Truck Drivers, Local No. 70Supreme Court of the United States · 1974
Arthur F. Sawtelle, Etc. v. George E. FarrellCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1995
George Lambert, D/B/A Rainbow Fruit v. Sam Kysar and Joan Kysar, D/B/A Lewis River Tree FarmCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1993

14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.