Legal Opinion
Holden v. Holden
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Decided May 10, 1988No. 02630PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
CAVANAUGH, Judge:
The issue in this case is whether a court in Pennsylvania may exercise in personam jurisdiction over the appellant, Diane Holden, in a civil action where all of the conduct by the appellant took place in Texas. If such jurisdiction does not exist, the court below erred in refusing to open a *186default judgment entered against the appellant and the complaint against her must be dismissed.
The appellee, Frances G. Holden, and Dr. Stanley Holden, who is not a party to this litigation, were divorced in Luzerne County, Pennsylvania, following extended and complex proceedings. A…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- International Shoe Co. v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1945
- World-Wide Volkswagen Corp. v. WoodsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
- Hanson v. DencklaSupreme Court of the United States · 1958
- McGee v. International Life InsuranceSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
- Kulko v. Superior Court of Cal., City and County of San FranciscoSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Tandy Computer Leasing v. DeMarcoSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1989
- Commonwealth Capital Funding, Inc. v. Franklin Square HospitalSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1993
- Holden v. HoldenSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1988
- The Wolf Organization, Inc. v. TNG Contractors, LLCCourt of Appeals of Tennessee · 2019