Legal Opinion
McNeely v. Clayton and Lambert Manufacturing Co.
District Court, D. Minnesota
Decided November 8, 1968No. 3-68 Civ. 159, 3-67 Civ. 72PublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
NEVILLE, District Judge.
In two different actions, the defendant Clayton and Lambert Manufacturing Company (Clayton & Lambert) has moved to quash service of process upon it and to dismiss the complaints for want of personal jurisdiction. In McNeely v. Clayton & Lambert Mfg. Co., 3-68 Civ. 159, defendant alternatively has moved, if the motion to dismiss not be granted, to transfer the venue of that case pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a) to the United States District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin. Jurisdiction over the subject matter as to both cases is based on diversity of…
2Cases cited57 opinions
- International Shoe Co. v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1945
- Hanson v. DencklaSupreme Court of the United States · 1958
- McGee v. International Life InsuranceSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
- Perkins v. Benguet Consolidated Mining Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1952
- Harold Noel Arrowsmith, Jr. v. United Press InternationalCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1963
52 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- McQuay, Inc. v. Samuel Schlosberg, Inc.District Court, D. Minnesota · 1971
- Thunanber v. Uponor, Inc.District Court, D. Minnesota · 2012
- Winkel v. Eden Rehabilitation Treatment Facility, Inc.Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 1988
- Anderson v. Matson Navigation Co.District Court, D. Minnesota · 1971
- Martin v. Unarco Industries, Inc.District Court, E.D. Wisconsin · 1971
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.