Legal Opinion
Panatech Corp. v. Carl Zeiss, Inc.
District Court, S.D. New York
Decided February 27, 1953PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
EDELSTEIN, District Judge.
Plaintiff has brought an action against the Attorney General of the United States, the Collector of Customs for the Port of New York and Carl Zeiss, Inc. for relief based upon the refusal of the Collector to permit the importation by the plaintiff of certain trade-marked merchandise. The Attorney General has moved to dismiss the complaint on the ground that he cannot be sued in the Southern District of New York and that he is an indispensable party to the maintenance of the action. The other defendants join in the motion on the latter ground.
The Attorney General, by…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Massachusetts v. MellonSupreme Court of the United States · 1923
- Waterman v. MacKenzieSupreme Court of the United States · 1891
- Central Union Trust Co. of NY v. GarvanSupreme Court of the United States · 1921
- Butterworth v. HillSupreme Court of the United States · 1885
- Commercial Trust Co. of NJ v. MillerSupreme Court of the United States · 1923
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- In the Matter of Alexander M. Goldberg v. Hon. Julius J. Hoffman, Hon. Herbert Brownell, Jr., Hon. H. Brian Holland and Hon. Robert TiekenCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1955
- Brownell, Atty. Gen v. Ketcham Wire & Mfg. CoCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1954
- Tropic Builders, Ltd. v. Naval Ammunition Depot Lualualei Quarters, Inc.Hawaii Supreme Court · 1965
- Ladue & Co. v. Herbert Brownell, Jr., Attorney General of the United States, Etc.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1955
- Taterka v. BrownellDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1956