Legal Opinion

United States ex rel. M. G. M. Construction Co. v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co.

District Court, N.D. California

Decided May 5, 1965No. Civ. No. 9022PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MaeBRIDE, District Judge.

This is an action brought by the United States for the use of plaintiffs, M.G.M. Construction Co., a corporation, and A. M. Van Valkenburg & Co., a corporation, against defendants, Paul Hardeman, Inc., a corporation, and Aetna Casualty and Surety Co., a corporation, for work performed to complete-a NASA project for the United States. The action has been instituted under the provisions of Title 40 U.S.C.A. § 270a et seq.

The defendants have filed a motion to dismiss the case for improper venue under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 12(b) (3). They have also…

2Cases cited21 opinions

  1. Hoffman v. BlaskiSupreme Court of the United States · 1960
  2. Neirbo Co. v. Bethlehem Shipbuilding Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1939
  3. Wm. H. Muller & Co., Inc. v. Swedish American Line Ltd. And Transatlantic Steamship Company, Ltd.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1955
  4. Moseley v. Electronic & Missile Facilities, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1963
  5. Kaiser-Frazer Corp. v. Otis & Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1952

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

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Myers v. American Dental Ass'nCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1982
  2. Perini Corporation v. Orion Insurance Co.District Court, E.D. California · 1971
  3. Myers v. American Dental AssociationCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1983
  4. Geiger v. KeilaniDistrict Court, E.D. Michigan · 1967
  5. United States ex rel. Gigliello v. Sovereign Construction Co.District Court, D. Massachusetts · 1970

4 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