Legal Opinion
Albert Levine Associates, Inc. v. Hudson
District Court, S.D. New York
Decided November 9, 1967No. 67-Civ. 2831PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
CROAKE, District Judge.
MEMORANDUM
Defendant, E. H. Hudson Company (HUDSON) moves, among other things, to dismiss for want of personam jurisdiction and insufficient service of process. Plaintiff Albert Levine Associates, Inc. (LEVINE), relying on the Supreme Court’s decision in National Equipment Rental, Ltd. v. Szukhent, 375 U.S. 311, 84 S.Ct. 411, 11 L.Ed.2d 354 (1964), asserts that personam jurisdiction exists and service was proper.
HUDSON is a business located in Georgia. LEVINE, a New York corporation, contracted to supply tractor parts to HUDSON under a credit arrangement. The contract,…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- National Equipment Rental, Ltd. v. SzukhentSupreme Court of the United States · 1964
- Gilbert v. BurnstineNew York Court of Appeals · 1931
- Bowles v. J. J. Schmitt & Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1948
- Kenny Construction Company, Inc. v. Herschel H. Allen, T/a J. E. Greiner CompanyCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1957
- Emerson Radio & Phonograph Corp. v. EskindNew York Supreme Court · 1957
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Top Form Mills, Inc. v. Sociedad Nationale Industria Applicazioni ViscosaDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1977
- Leesona Corporation v. Concordia Mfg. Co.District Court, D. Rhode Island · 1970
- Aamco Automatic Transmissions, Inc. v. HagenbarthDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1968