Williams v. Romarm S.A.
District Court, D. Maryland
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION
THEODORE D. CHUANG, District Judge.
Plaintiffs Norman Williams (“Williams”), Diane Howe (“Howe”), Kevin Attaway (“Attaway”). and Jamel Blakeley (“Blake-ley”) (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) assert various causes of action against Defendant Ro-marm S.A. (“Romarm”) arising from two shootings, during which the firing of an assault weapon marketed and sold by Ro-marm resulted in the death of the son of Williams and Howe and injuries to Atta-way and Blakeley. Pending before the Court are Romarm’s Motion to Dismiss and Plaintiffs’ Motion for Jurisdictional Discovery. For the reasons…
2Cases cited25 opinions
- International Shoe Co. v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1945
- Burger King Corp. v. RudzewiczSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
- World-Wide Volkswagen Corp. v. WoodsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
- Helicopteros Nacionales De Colombia, S. A. v. HallSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Asahi Metal Industry Co. v. Superior Court of Cal., Solano Cty.Supreme Court of the United States · 1987
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Hutton v. Hydra-Tech, Inc.District Court, M.D. North Carolina · 2016
- Al-Sabah v. World Business Lenders, LLCDistrict Court, D. Maryland · 2023
- Contiem v. GullionDistrict Court, D. Maryland · 2024
- Edokobi v. SunTrust BankDistrict Court, D. Maryland · 2020
- Sant v. Marriott International, Inc.District Court, D. Maryland · 2023
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.