Legal Opinion
Eavzan v. Polo Ralph Lauren Corp.
District Court, S.D. New York
Decided November 19, 1998No. 97 CIV. 8974(RLC)PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
ROBERT L. CARTER, District Judge.
Plaintiff Barry Eavzan (“Eavzan”) has filed an action alleging malicious prosecution and intentional wrongs. Defendants John P. Quirk and International Research Group, Inc. move to dismiss pursuant to Rule 12(b)(2), Fed.R.Civ.P., or alternatively pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6), Fed.R.Civ.P. and also move to sanction Eavzan pursuant to Rule 11, Fed. R. Civ. P. Defendants Polo Ralph Lauren Corporation and Lee Sporn move to dismiss pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6), Fed.R.Civ.P., or alternatively, for change of venue pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a).
Background
This…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Parklane Hosiery Co. v. ShoreSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
- Heiser v. WoodruffSupreme Court of the United States · 1946
- Hoffritz for Cutlery, Inc. And Edwin Jay, Inc. v. Amajac, Ltd. And Jack E. AyersCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1985
- Metromedia Co. v. FugazyCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1992
- United States v. First National City BankSupreme Court of the United States · 1965
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Cohen v. Avanade, Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 2012
- John Street Leasehold, LLC v. Capital Management Resources, L.P.District Court, S.D. New York · 2001
- Storey v. Cello Holdings, L.L.C.District Court, S.D. New York · 2002
- Ford Motor Co. v. Obsolete Ford Parts, Inc.District Court, E.D. Michigan · 2004
- Raytheon Company v. BAE Systems Technology Solutions & Services, Inc.Superior Court of Delaware · 2017
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.