Legal Opinion
Donnely v. Copeland Intra Lenses, Inc.
District Court, E.D. New York
Decided June 5, 1980No. 79 C 2553PublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
NEAHER, District Judge.
This motion for relief from a judgment pursuant to Rule 60(b), F.R.Civ.P., arises out of a personal injury action commenced by plaintiff, a Minnesota resident, in the United States District Court for the District of Minnesota. She sought to recover for injuries allegedly suffered as a result of wearing intraocular lenses manufactured by defendant Copeland Intra Lenses, Inc. (“Copeland”), a New York corporation, and sterilized and packaged by the third party defendant Torigian Laboratories, Inc. (“To-rigian Laboratories”), also a New York corporation.…
2Cases cited30 opinions
- International Shoe Co. v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1945
- Mullane v. Central Hanover Bank & Trust Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1950
- 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
25 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Bally Export Corporation, a Delaware Corporation v. Balicar, Ltd., a Foreign Corporation, and Juliano Internacional S.A., a Foreign CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1986
- Burda Media, Inc. v. ViertelCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2005
- Burda Media, Inc. v. ViertelCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2005
- Indian Head National Bank of Nashua v. Richard Brunelle, U.S. Marshal for the District of New Hampshire, and Conproco Corporation, Ipa Systems, Inc.Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1982
- Rohm & Haas Co. v. AriesDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1984
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.