Legal Opinion
Romann v. Geissenberger Manufacturing Corp.
District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
Decided October 20, 1994No. 2:94-cv-03325PublishedCited by 18 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
JOYNER, District Judge.
This is a breach of contract action brought under diversity jurisdiction in which defendants have moved to dismiss plaintiffs complaint for lack of personal jurisdiction pursuant to Rule 12(b)(2) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. In the alternative, defendants ask the Court to dismiss the case for lack of proper venue under Rule 12(b)(3), or to transfer it to the District of New Jersey, Newark Division, pursuant to 28 U.S.C.A. §§ 1404(a), 1631 (West 1994). For the following reasons, this Court concludes that it cannot take personal…
2Cases cited24 opinions
- International Shoe Co. v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1945
- Burger King Corp. v. RudzewiczSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
- World-Wide Volkswagen Corp. v. WoodsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
- Hanson v. DencklaSupreme Court of the United States · 1958
- Helicopteros Nacionales De Colombia, S. A. v. HallSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by18 opinions
- Elbeco Inc. v. Estrella De Plato, Corp.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1997
- Pedzewick v. FoeDistrict Court, D. Massachusetts · 1997
- Charlesworth v. Marco Manufacturing Co.District Court, N.D. Indiana · 1995
- Barry v. Mortgage Servicing Acquisition Corp.District Court, D. Rhode Island · 1995
- Lindley v. Caterpillar, Inc.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2000
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.