Burger King Corp. v. Holder
District Court, S.D. Florida
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER ON MOTIONS TO DISMISS
NESBITT, District Judge.
This cause comes to the Court upon Burger King Corp. and Blackerby’s (“Burger King”) Motion to Dismiss Defendant Counter-Plaintiff Harold Holder’s Amended Counterclaim; . Gappa and Rackstraw’s Motion to Dismiss For Lack of Personal Jurisdiction; 1 and Bane One Leasing and Ted Cianchette’s (“Bane One”) Motion to Dismiss Defendant Counter-Plaintiff Harold Holder’s Amended Counterclaim.
Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure authorizes a court to dismiss a claim on the basis of a dispositive issue of law. Neitzke v. Williams, 490…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Conley v. GibsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
- Neitzke v. WilliamsSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
- Hishon v. King & SpaldingSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Venetian Salami Co. v. ParthenaisSupreme Court of Florida · 1989
- Besett v. BasnettSupreme Court of Florida · 1980
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by22 opinions
- Burger King Corp. v. WeaverCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1999
- Hansen v. Neumueller GmbHDistrict Court, D. Delaware · 1995
- Barnes v. Burger King Corp.District Court, S.D. Florida · 1996
- Motorcity of Jacksonville, Ltd. v. Southeast Bank N.A.Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1996
- Nautica International, Inc. v. Intermarine USA, L.P.District Court, S.D. Florida · 1998
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.