Legal Opinion
Murdoch v. City of Asbury Park
District Court, S.D. New York
Decided July 30, 1942PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
COXE, District Judge.
Defendant, a municipal corporation of the State of New Jersey, appearing specially, moves under Rule 12(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, 28 U.S.C.A. following section 723c, to set aside the service of the process and the levy of attachment, to vacate the order for the service of the process by publication and the warrant of attachment, and to dismiss the action.
The action is brought to recover a balance of $696,582.28, plus interest of $62,-147.07 due upon a judgment obtained by plaintiff’s assignors against the defendant in the District Court of the United…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Brush v. CommissionerSupreme Court of the United States · 1937
- Faitoute Iron & Steel Co. v. City of Asbury ParkSupreme Court of the United States · 1942
- Hourigan v. Township of North BergenSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1934
- Federal Deposit Ins. Corporation v. CasadyCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1939
- Pacific Gas & Electric Co. v. Sacramento Municipal Utility Dist.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1937
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Merritt-Chapman & Scott Corporation v. Public Utility District No. 2 of Grant County, WashingtonCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1963
- Morfessis v. ThomasDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1952
- Merritt-Chapman & Scott Corporation v. Public Utility District No. 2 of Grant County, WashingtonCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1963
- Merritt-Chapman & Scott Corporation v. Public Utility District No. 2 of Grant County, WashingtonCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1963