Legal Opinion
Lucas v. Natoli
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided June 17, 1991No. 90-55072PublishedCited by 29 opinions
1Per curiam
This is an interlocutory appeal certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1292(b). Appellants, who were named as defendants in a civil action filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of California, were served in a foreign country eleven months after the complaint was filed. The question certified for this appeal is whether the requirement of Fed.R.Civ.P. 4(j) that the complaint be served within 120 days after filing applies to service in a foreign country. The district court ruled that it did not because of the plain language of Rule 4(j), which reads, in relevant part: “This…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Joseph Montalbano v. Easco Hand Tools, Inc., the Moore Company, the Stanley Works, Nannen American Corporation and Oh Industries, Rickles Home CentersCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1985
- Gordon v. HuntDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1987
- Gordon v. HuntCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1987
3Cited by29 opinions
- O'ROuRke Bros. Inc., an Iowa Corporation, and Jeff O'ROuRke v. Nesbitt Burns, Inc., a Canadian Corporation, Andreas F. Kiedrowski, and John C. DunnCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2000
- Nylok Corporation v. Fastener World Incorporation, Nasalok Coating Corporation, Unilock Industrial Co., and Nypatch Industrial Co.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2005
- Institute of Cetacean Research v. Sea Shepherd Conservation SocietyDistrict Court, W.D. Washington · 2015
- In Re S1 Corp. Securities LitigationDistrict Court, N.D. Georgia · 2001
- Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors of Southold Development Corp. v. Mittemyer (In Re Southold Development Corp.)District Court, E.D. New York · 1992
24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.