Legal Opinion

Zucco v. Dobeckmun Co.

District Court, D. Massachusetts

Decided May 22, 1957No. Civ. A. No. 57-145PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

ALDRICH, District Judge.

With regard to Dobeckmun’s motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction, *370I find that Dobeckmun has an active sales office in Boston which it has maintained for many years; that in addition to soliciting orders, one or more persons in this office, on authorization from the home office, investigate complaints, and possess at least a modicum of authority to settle matters of minor nature on their own initiative. I think it fair to assume that with six permanent salesmen, promotional work, held important in Wyshak v. Anaconda Copper Mining Co., 328 Mass. 219, 103 N.E.2d 230,…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Carter v. Yardley & Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1946
  2. George P. Converse & Co., Inc. v. Polaroid CorporationCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1957
  3. Wyshak v. Anaconda Copper Mining Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1952
  4. Denis v. Perfect Parts, Inc.District Court, D. Massachusetts · 1956
  5. London's, Inc. v. MacK Shirt Corp.District Court, D. Massachusetts · 1953

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Valdez v. Ford, Bacon & Davis, Texas, Inc.District Court, N.D. Indiana · 1974
  2. City of Leominster v. Pittsburgh-Des Moines Steel Co.District Court, D. Massachusetts · 1962

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

Powered by the Exa API