Legal Opinion

Chromcraft Corp. v. Mirox, S. A.

District Court, N.D. Mississippi

Decided August 30, 1977No. DC 76-120-SPublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM OF DECISION

ORMA R. SMITH, District Judge.

The plaintiff Chromcraft Corporation (Chromcraft) is a New York corporation qualified to do and doing business in Mississippi. Chromcraft has its principal place of business in the City of Senatobia, Tate County, Mississippi and is, therefore, a Mississippi citizen within the purview of 28 U.S.C. § 1332(c).

Defendant Mirox, S.A., is a Belgium Corporation (Mirox) and a subsidiary of Glaverbel, S.A. During the period of time involved in the action sub judice, Mirox was a societe anonyme organized and existing under the laws of Belgium.

Except…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. Erie Railroad v. TompkinsSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
  2. International Shoe Co. v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1945
  3. McGee v. International Life InsuranceSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
  4. Mladinich v. KohnMississippi Supreme Court · 1964
  5. Smith v. Temco, Inc.Mississippi Supreme Court · 1971

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Thompson v. Chrysler Motors Corp.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1985
  2. Jack Thompson, Individually and as Next Friend for Clinton J. Heath, Etc. v. Chrysler Motors Corporation, Crimson Dodge, Inc., Martha v. Nash v. Chrysler Motors Corporation, Crimson Dodge, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1985

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

Powered by the Exa API