Legal Opinion
Moore v. Gorman
District Court, S.D. New York
Decided January 20, 1948PublishedCited by 18 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
RYAN, District Judge.
Certain of the defendants, individually and as co-partners conducting business under the name of Coffin, Betz & Sullivan (sometimes hereinafter called defendants), move to dismiss the action. The stated grounds of the motion are: Lack of jurisdiction over the subject matter; lack of jurisdiction over their persons; and improper venue. The motion is made under Rule 12(b) (1) (2) and (3) of the Rules of Civil Procedure, 28 U.S.C.A. following section 723c.
The defendants are named as such only in the first of the five claims alleged in the complaint. Accordingly, the motion…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Deckert v. Independence Shares Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1940
- Schillner v. H. Vaughan Clarke & Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1943
3Cited by18 opinions
- Fed. Sec. L. Rep. P 93,213 Hill York Corporation v. American International Franchises, Inc., Gurn H. FreemanCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1971
- Fratt v. RobinsonCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1953
- Zorn v. AndersonDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1966
- Blackwell v. BentsenCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1953
- Creswell-Keith, Inc. v. WillinghamCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1959
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.