Whyenlee Indus. Ltd. v. Superior Court of San Mateo Cnty.
California Court of Appeal, 5th District
1Opinion of the CourtStreeter, J.
Whyenlee Industries Ltd. (Whyenlee), a defendant below, petitions for a writ of mandate directing the trial court to grant its motion to quash service of a summons.1 Because plaintiffs used an agent to serve a summons on Whyenlee in Hong Kong *842without first making a request to the Hong Kong government's Central Authority, Whyenlee now argues this attempt at service of process was ineffective under the Convention on the Service Abroad of Judicial and Extrajudicial Documents in Civil or Commercial Matters ( Nov. 15, 1965, 20 U.S.T. 361, T.I.A.S. No. 6638 ) ("Hague Service Convention" or…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Mullane v. Central Hanover Bank & Trust Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1950
- Volkswagenwerk Aktiengesellschaft v. SchlunkSupreme Court of the United States · 1988
- Water Splash, Inc. v. MenonSupreme Court of the United States · 2017
- Koehler v. DodwellCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1998
- McIntire v. China MediaExpress Holdings, Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 2013
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Maxell, Ltd. v. Amperex Technology LimitedDistrict Court, W.D. Texas · 2022
- Zhang v. LoDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2020