Legal Opinion

Kitzinger v. Gimbel Bros., Inc.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided April 22, 1976No. Appeal, 255PublishedCited by 18 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Hoffman, J„

In January, 1973, the minor plaintiff in the action which gives rise to this appeal sustained serious injuries when his pajamas caught fire. The minor plaintiff and his parents sued Gimbel Brothers, Inc., (“appellee,” herein), the seller of the pajamas. Appellee moved to join the supplier of the pajamas, Textile Alliance, Ltd., (“appellant,” herein), as an additional defendant. Appellant, a Hong Kong concern with no offices in the United States, raised preliminary objections to personal jurisdiction under the Pennsylvania “long-arm” statute. The lower court dismissed the…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. International Shoe Co. v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1945
  2. Hanson v. DencklaSupreme Court of the United States · 1958
  3. McGee v. International Life InsuranceSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
  4. Southern MacHine Company, Inc. v. Mohasco Industries, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1968
  5. In-Flight Devices Corporation v. Van Dusen Air, Incorporated, Etc.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1972

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

3Cited by18 opinions

  1. Burch v. Sears, Roebuck and Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1983
  2. Van Buskirk v. Carey Canadian Mines, Ltd.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1985
  3. Moran v. G. & W.H. Corson, Inc.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1991
  4. Hart v. McCollumSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1977
  5. Van Buskirk v. Carey Canadian Mines, Ltd.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1985

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

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API