Legal Opinion
Hillis v. Heineman
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided November 19, 2010No. 09-17040PublishedCited by 38 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
GOULD, Circuit Judge:
We must decide whether a defendant who files a counterclaim or a third-party complaint waives the asserted defense of improper venue under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(3). We hold that filing a counterclaim or a third-party complaint does not waive the defense of improper venue.
I
In 2006, Steve and Diane Hillis were solicited by John Fox, who had been retained by Resolve Staffing to sell securities. Fox persuaded Steve Hillis to pay $135,000 and sign a Subscription Agreement in return for 90,000 shares of Resolve Staffing common stock. In 2007, Hillis and…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- United States v. RutherfordSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
- United States of America, Ex rel.linda A. Lujan v. Hughes Aircraft CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2001
- Connecticut General Life Insurance Company v. New Images Of Beverly HillsCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2003
- Dennis v. Experian InfomationCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2008
- United States v. FortCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2007
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by38 opinions
- Biller v. Toyota Motor Corp.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2012
- People's Trust Fed. Credit Union v. Nat'l Credit Union Admin. Bd.District Court, D. New Mexico · 2018
- Anderson Living Trust v. WPX Energy Production, LLCDistrict Court, D. New Mexico · 2014
- Profits Plus Capital Management, LLC v. PodestaIdaho Supreme Court · 2014
- Micha v. Sun Life Assurance of Canada, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2017
33 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.