Pickthall v. Anaconda Copper Min. Co.
District Court, S.D. New York
1Opinion of the Court
MEDINA, District Judge.
Defendant Butte, Anaconda and Pacific Railway Company by its attorneys appearing specially and solely for the purpose of the motion, moves to set aside the service of process and'to dismiss the complaint. As the action arises under the Employers’ Liability Act of the United States, 45 U.S.C.A. § 51 et seq., the motion is framed in the familiar double aspect. It attacks the jurisdiction of the court over the person of the defendant and, at the same time, claims improper venue. The questions, while not identical, are similar and may be treated together. 45 U.S.C.A. § 56…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Green v. Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railway Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1907
- Miles v. Illinois Central RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1942
- Conley v. Mathieson Alkali WorksSupreme Court of the United States · 1903
- Compania Mexicana Refinadora Island v. Compania Metropolitana De OleoductosNew York Court of Appeals · 1928
- Empire Fuel Co. v. LyonsCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1919
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by16 opinions
- Kilpatrick v. Texas & P. Ry. Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1948
- Augustus Blount v. Peerless Chemicals (p.r.) Inc., and Peerless Oil & Chemical Corp.,defendants-AppelleesCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1963
- Kane v. Central American Mining & Oil, Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 1964
- Burroughs Wellcome Co. v. Giant Food, Inc.District Court, D. Delaware · 1975
- General Electric Co. v. Central Transit Warehouse Co.District Court, W.D. Missouri · 1955
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.