Legal Opinion

Tom Brown & Co. v. Francis

District of Columbia Court of Appeals

Decided May 12, 1992No. 91-CV-469PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

FARRELL, Associate Judge:

Appellant contends that the trial judge erred by granting appellee’s motion for summary judgment and thereby enforcing appellee’s foreign default judgment against appellant. The default judgment had been obtained in a lawsuit filed in Maine. Appellant claims that the Maine court did not have in personam jurisdiction over it, thus rendering the judgment void and unenforceable. We consider the materials offered in opposition to summary judgment in the light most favorable to appellant. Adickes v. S.H. Kress & Co., 398 U.S. 144, 157, 90 S.Ct. 1598, 1608, 26 L.Ed.2d 142…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. International Shoe Co. v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1945
  2. Adickes v. S. H. Kress & Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1970
  3. Burger King Corp. v. RudzewiczSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
  4. Hanson v. DencklaSupreme Court of the United States · 1958
  5. Asahi Metal Industry Co. v. Superior Court of Cal., Solano Cty.Supreme Court of the United States · 1987

12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Shoppers Food Warehouse v. MorenoDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2000
  2. BOYNE USA INC v. STARR SURPLUS LINES INSURANCE COMPANYDistrict Court, D. Maine · 2025
  3. Shoppers Food Warehouse v. MorenoDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2000

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API