Aeroil Burner Co. v. Littleford
District Court, S.D. New York
1Opinion of the Court
THACHER, District Judge.
Upon motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction of the person, jurisdictional facts may be controverted, although alleged in the bill of complaint. Miller v. Minerals Separation, Ltd. (D. C.) 275 F. 380. The question cannot be presented by answer, because that would waive it. Harkness v. Hyde, 98 U. S. 476, 25 L. Ed. 237. If within the rule in Tyler Co. v. Ludlow-Saylor Wire Co., 236 U. S. 723, 35 S. Ct. 458, 59 L. Ed. 808, Westinghouse Electric & Mfg. Co. v. Stanley Electric Mfg. Co. (C. C.) 116 F. 641, and Cutler-Hammer Co. v. Curtis & Carhart (C. C. A.) 296 F. 117,…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Harkness v. HydeSupreme Court of the United States · 1879
- W. S. Tyler Co. v. Ludlow-Saylor Wire Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1915
- Westinghouse Electric & Mfg. Co. v. Stanley Electric Mfg. Co.U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York · 1902
- Cutler-Hammer Mfg. Co. v. Curtis & Carhart, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1924
- Miller v. Minerals Separation Ltd.District Court, N.D. California · 1921