Grantham v. Aetna Life & Casualty
District Court, N.D. Texas
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER AND MEMORANDUM OPINION
MAHON, District Judge.
There is now before the Court defendant Mary Lee Grantham’s motion to dismiss.
The Court having considered said motion, plaintiff’s response thereto, and having heard oral argument has determined that defendant Mary Lee Grantham’s motion to dismiss should be granted.
The plaintiff seeking to establish the jurisdiction of a federal court has the burden to establish the Court’s jurisdiction in response to a Rule 12(b)(2) motion challenging the jurisdiction. Product Promotions, Inc. v. Cousteau, 495 F.2d 483 (5th Cir. 1974); 5 Wright & Miller,…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- International Shoe Co. v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1945
- Hanson v. DencklaSupreme Court of the United States · 1958
- U-Anchor Advertising, Inc. v. BurtTexas Supreme Court · 1977
- Product Promotions, Inc. v. Jacques Y. CousteauCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1974
- O'Brien v. Lanpar CompanyTexas Supreme Court · 1966
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Oscar Wyatt, Jr. v. Jerome KaplanCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1982
- Jim Fox Enterprises, Inc. v. Air FranceCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1983
- Deininger v. DeiningerDistrict Court, N.D. Texas · 1988