Money-Line, Inc. v. Cunningham
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
Hancock, Jr., J.
In Gladding Corp. v Balco-Pedrick Parts Corp. (76 AD2d 1) we held that defendant’s act in placing an order in New York for goods to be shipped from Florida did not, under the circumstances, amount to sufficient ¡Florida contacts to subject it to in personam jurisdiction in that State (see Hanson v Denckla, 357 US 235; International Shoe Co. v Washington, 326 US 310). In certain respects it may be argued that defendants here in making a contract in New York for services to be performed in Ohio have done more *61to support jurisdiction over their persons in…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- International Shoe Co. v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1945
- Hanson v. DencklaSupreme Court of the United States · 1958
- Shaffer v. HeitnerSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
- McQuay, Inc. v. Samuel Schlosberg, Inc.District Court, D. Minnesota · 1971
- Oswalt Industries, Inc. v. GilmoreDistrict Court, D. Kansas · 1969
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Yu v. Signet Bank/VirginiaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1999
- Chalek v. KleinAppellate Court of Illinois · 1990
- Signet Bank/Virginia v. TillisCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1990
- Porcello v. BrackettAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1981
- FDIC v. CaliendoDistrict Court, D. New Hampshire · 1992
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.