Legal Opinion

Montague v. Electronic Corporation of America

District Court, S.D. New York

Decided February 14, 1948PublishedCited by 27 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

COXE, District Judge.

These are motions by the defendants in the above-entitled actions to dismiss the amended complaints for lack of jurisdiction over the subject matter, Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, rule 12(b) (1), 28 U. S.C.A. following section 723c or, in the alternative, to require the plaintiffs to furnish undertakings for the payment of costs, including reasonable attorneys’ fees. There are also cross-motions by the plaintiffs in the two actions for discovery and inspection of documents, books and papers in the possession, custody and control of certain of the defendants. F.R.C.P.…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Kepner v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1904
  2. D. Ginsberg & Sons, Inc. v. PopkinSupreme Court of the United States · 1932
  3. Missouri, Kansas & Texas Railway Co. v. WulfSupreme Court of the United States · 1913
  4. Kardon v. National Gypsum Co.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1946
  5. United States v. ChaseSupreme Court of the United States · 1890

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by27 opinions

  1. Herman & MacLean v. HuddlestonSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
  2. Fed. Sec. L. Rep. P 98,777, 11 Fed. R. Evid. Serv. 781 Chemetron Corporation, Cross-Appellant v. Business Funds, Inc., Cross-AppelleesCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1982
  3. Trussell v. United Underwriters, Ltd.District Court, D. Colorado · 1964
  4. Lollar v. BakerCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1999
  5. In re Itel Securities LitigationDistrict Court, N.D. California · 1981

22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API