Legal Opinion
General Electric Company v. City of Tacoma
District Court, W.D. Washington
Decided January 17, 1966No. 3347PublishedCited by 13 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
BOLDT, District Judge.
The questions presented on the motion to dismiss are whether the contract provision providing that litigation shall be in the particularly designated state court is illegal; and, if not, whether the provision is applicable to the issues presented in this case. 1
On the record made to this time, namely, without responsive pleading to the complaint and only upon motion to dismiss with affidavits submitted in connection therewith, in my opinion it cannot be determined whether or not the contract provision in question is or will be applicable to issues of fact or law that may…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Home Ins. Co. v. MorseSupreme Court of the United States · 1874
- Wm. H. Muller & Co., Inc. v. Swedish American Line Ltd. And Transatlantic Steamship Company, Ltd.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1955
- Mittenthal v. MascagniMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1903
- Cerro De Pasco Copper Corp. v. Knut Knutsen, O. A. S.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1951
- United Fuel Gas Co. v. Columbian Fuel CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1948
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- Paper Express, Limited, an Illinois Corporation v. Pfankuch Maschinen Gmbh, a German CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1992
- Central Contracting Co. v. Maryland Casualty Co.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1966
- Perini Corporation v. Orion Insurance Co.District Court, E.D. California · 1971
- Green v. Clinic Masters, Inc.South Dakota Supreme Court · 1978
- Davis Media Group, Inc. v. Best Western International, Inc.District Court, D. Maryland · 2004
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.