Legal Opinion
Dufek v. Roux Distributing Company
District Court, S.D. New York
Decided August 31, 1954PublishedCited by 10 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
WALSH, District Judge.
Plaintiff’s motion to change venue to the District Court for the District of Minnesota, Fifth Division, is granted.
Plaintiff’s claim that the convenience of the parties and witnesses and the in terest of justice will be served by changing venue is not disputed. Her action is for breach of warranty alleging that she was injured using a hair dye distributed by the defendant. She, her physicians, and the person who sold the hair dye all reside in Minnesota. Plaintiff attempted to serve an appropriate officer or agent of the defendant in Minnesota but was unsuccessful.
Defenda…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- International Shoe Co. v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1945
- Travelers Health Assn. v. Virginia Ex Rel. State Corporation Comm'nSupreme Court of the United States · 1950
- Foster-Milburn Co. v. Knight, Chief JudgeCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1950
- Schilling v. Roux Distributing Co. Inc.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1953
- Barnhart v. John B. Rogers Producing Co.District Court, N.D. Ohio · 1949
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Florio v. Powder Power Tool Corp.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1957
- Harry Rich Corporation v. Curtiss-Wright CorporationDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1969
- William R. Le Vecke and Reed Levecke v. Griesedieck Western Brewery Co., a Corporation, and Carling Brewing Co., a CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1956
- Anschell v. SackheimDistrict Court, D. New Jersey · 1956
- Mitchell v. GundlachDistrict Court, D. Maryland · 1955
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.