Legal Opinion
Pennsylvania Orthopedic Ass'n v. Mercedes-Benz A.G.
District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
Decided January 31, 1995No. Civ. A. No. 94-4188PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM
JOYNER, District Judge.
Today this Court denies Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs’ Complaint for failure to effect service in a timely fashion, although we find that service of the complaint has not been made.
According to the pleadings and attached exhibits, on July 18, 1994, counsel for Plaintiffs arranged to have the instant complaint and summons served on the Ministry of Justice of Baden-Wurrtemberg in the Federal Republic of Germany. This was done in an attempt to effect service under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(f)(1) & (h)(2) and the Hague Convention on the Service…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Volkswagenwerk Aktiengesellschaft v. SchlunkSupreme Court of the United States · 1988
- United States v. Bennie MitchellCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1986
- Northwest Airlines, Inc. v. Air Line Pilots Ass'nSupreme Court of the United States · 1988
- Lucas v. NatoliCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1991
- Securities and Exchange Commission v. TomeCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1987
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- United States Ex Rel. Thomas v. Siemens AGDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2010
- In Re S1 Corp. Securities LitigationDistrict Court, N.D. Georgia · 2001
- Kim v. FRANK MOHN A/SDistrict Court, S.D. Texas · 1995
- Maale v. FrancisDistrict Court, S.D. Florida · 2009
- A Love of Food I, LLC v. Maoz Vegetarian USA, Inc.District Court, District of Columbia · 2011
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.