Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. FINE v. DELALANDE, INC. 545 F.Supp. 275 (S.D.N.Y. 1982) Case Brief.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. In re Richard A. ALCORN and Steven Feola Supreme Court of Arizona, 202 Ariz. 62, 41 P.3d 600.
Advertisements

Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. In re Richard A. ALCORN and Steven Feola Supreme Court of Arizona, 202 Ariz. 62, 41 P.3d 600.
Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. In re Disciplinary Proceeding Against SCHAFER Supreme Court of Washington, 149 Wash.2d 148,
Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. U.S. v. Willard JOHNSON U.S. Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit, 327 F.3d 554 (2003) Case Brief.
Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. STATE v. BUTLER 19 Ohio St.2d 55, 249 N.E.2d 818 (1969) Case Brief.
Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. STATE OF OKLAHOMA ex rel. OKLAHOMA BAR ASSOCIATION v. TWEEDY, Supreme Court of Oklahoma 2000.
Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. DECK v. MISSOURI 125 S.Ct (2005) Case Brief.
Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. GEORGIA HS ASSN v. WADDELL 248 Ga. 542, 285 S.E.2d 7 (1981) Case Brief.
An Introductory Session
© 2005 by Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved.1 CALIFORNIA CIVIL LITIGATION SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION.
Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. COHEN v. BAYSIDE S&L 62 Misc.2d 738, 309 N.Y.S.2d 980 (1970) Case Brief.
Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. LUCY v. ZEHMER 196 Va. 493, 84 S.E.2d 516 (1954) Case Brief.
Pleadings -- Documents exchanged to initiate lawsuit Complaint Answer Summons Discovery –Depositions from Witnesses: –Production of Documents –Written.
Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. PONDER v. GRAHAM 4 Fla. 23 (1851) Case Brief.
Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. BLANTON v. CITY OF NORTH LAS VEGAS, NEVADA 489 U.S. 538 (1989) Case Brief.
Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. COLBY v. CARNEY HOSPITAL 356 Mass. 527, 254 N.E.2d 407 (1969) Case Brief.
 District courts have original jurisdiction, which is the authority to try a case for the first time.
Chapter 2 Courts and Jurisdiction
Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. PAPACHRISTOU v. JACKSONVILLE 405 U.S. 156 (1972) Case Brief.
Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. GRIFFIN v. CALIFORNIA 380 U.S. 609 (1965) Case Brief.
3-1 Chapter 3— The Court System REED SHEDD PAGNATTARO MOREHEAD F I F T E E N T H E D I T I O N McGraw-Hill/Irwin Copyright © 2010 by The McGraw-Hill Companies,
Thurs. Sept. 20. federal subject matter jurisdiction diversity and alienage jurisdiction.
Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. BROWN v. SOUTHLAND 620 F.Supp (E.D.Mo. 1985) Case Brief.
Thurs., Oct. 17. PERSONAL JURISDICTION IN STATE COURT.
Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. TRONCALLI v. JONES 237 Ga.App. 10, 514 S.E.2d 478 (1999) Case Brief.
Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. PENNSYLVANIA v. BRUDER 488 U.S. 9 (1988) Case Brief.
Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. GOGGIN v. NEW STATE BALLROOM 355 Mass. 718, 247 N.E.2d 350 (1969) Case Brief.
Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. McDERMOTT v. HARRIS Florida Circuit Court, Leon County, No (Fla. 2d Cir. Ct. Nov.
Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. STATE v. Pamela L. PETERS Supreme Court of Wisconsin, 263 Wis.2d 475, 665 N.W.2d 171 (2003)
Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. COCKRELL v. HILLERICH & BRADSBY CO. 611 S.E.2d 505 (S.C. 2005) Case Brief.
Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. CARRUTHERS v. STATE Supreme Court of Georgia, 528 S.E.2d 217 (2000) Case Brief.
© 2005 by Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved.1 CALIFORNIA CIVIL LITIGATION AMENDING THE PLEADINGS.
Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. STATE FARM v. CAMPBELL 538 U.S. 408 (2003) Case Brief.
Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. LYNCH v. LYNCH 164 Ariz. 127 (1990) Case Brief.
Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. LOWE v. QUINN 27 N.Y.2d 397, 267 N.E.2d (N.Y. 1971) Case Brief.
Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. WYMAN v. NEWHOUSE 93 F.2d 313 (2d Cir. 1937) Case Brief.
Civil Procedure 2005 Class 32: Removal, Personal Jurisdiction II Nov. 4, 2005.
Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. STATE v. STAFFORD 223 Kan. 62, 573 P.2d 970 (Kan. 1977) Case Brief.
The Judicial System The Courts and Jurisdiction. Courts Trial Courts: Decides controversies by determining facts and applying appropriate rules Appellate.
Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. STATE v. GUFFEY 262 S.W.2d 152 (Mo.Ct.App. 1953) Case Brief.
Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. MINNEAPOLIS STAR & TRIBUNE v. LEE 353 N.W.2d 213 (Minn.Ct.App. 1984) Case Brief.
Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. NEWMAN v. SUMMY CO. 133 F.2d 465 (2d Cir. 1943) Case Brief.
Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. BUSBY v. STATE 894 So.2d 88 (Fla. 2004) Case Brief.
Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. STATE v. WILLIAMS Supreme Court of Iowa 695 N.W.2d 23 (2005) Case Brief.
Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. STUMP v. SPARKMAN 435 U.S. 349 (1978) Case Brief.
Chapter 03 The U.S. Legal System McGraw-Hill/Irwin Copyright © 2012 by The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved.
Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. OREGON STATE BAR v. SMITH 149 Or.App. 171, 942 P.2d 793 (1997) Case Brief.
Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. RIEMERS v. GRAND FORKS HERALD 688 N.W.2d 167 (N.D. 2004) Case Brief.
A Question of Jurisdiction Jiwon Kang Seong Yeon Kim Heather Wogden IES10244.
Chapter 3 The U.S. Legal System Chapter 3: The U.S. Legal System
U.S. Legal System Chapter 1.
STATE v. WINDER 348 N.Y.S.2d 270 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 1973)
Federal Court Jurisdiction & Removal
COURT SYSTEMS AND JURISDICTION
Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning.
MARTIN v. MARCIANO 871 A.2d 911 (R.I. 2005)
Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning.
Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning.
CIVIL PROCEDURE ESSAY SERIES ESSAY QUESTION #4 MODEL ANSWER
Tues., Sept. 17.
COURT SYSTEMS AND JURISDICTION
CAMPBELL SOUP CO. v. WENTZ 172 F.2d 80 (3d Cir. 1948)
Chapter 6 Issue Identification
BROWN v. BROWN 300 So. 2d 719 (Fla. DCA 1974)
STATE v. KINGMAN 463 P.2d 638 (Wash. 1970)
NORRIS v. TOWN OF WHEATLAND 613 N.Y.S.2d 817 (S.Ct. Monroe Cty. 1994)
Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning.
ARENA LAND & INV. CO., INC. v. PETTY 69 F.3d 547 (10th Cir. 1995)
Courts and Court Systems
PEOPLE v. ALEXANDER 53 Ill.App.2d 299, 202 N.E.2d 841 (1964)
Presentation transcript:

Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. FINE v. DELALANDE, INC. 545 F.Supp. 275 (S.D.N.Y. 1982) Case Brief

Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. FINE v. DELALANDE, INC. PURPOSE: This case illustrates diversity jurisdiction; petition for removal to federal court, followed by motion to remand to state court.

Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. FINE v. DELALANDE, INC. CAUSE OF ACTION: Not stated in decision.

Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. FINE v. DELALANDE, INC. FACTS: This lawsuit began on April 1, 1982 in the New York Supreme Court, New York County, the same day on which the defendant Delalande, Inc. filed an action in this Court against the plaintiffs claiming diversity of citizenship. Delalande removed this action from the state court on April 20. By motion docketed May 5, 1982, the Fine plaintiffs sought the remand of this action to the state court as improvidently removed.

Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. FINE v. DELALANDE, INC. ISSUE: Whether the case should be remanded for lack of complete diversity.

Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. FINE v. DELALANDE, INC. HOLDING: Yes. Diversity was lacking.

Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. FINE v. DELALANDE, INC. REASONING: A corporation is deemed to be a citizen of the state wherein it has its principal place of business, and of the state of its incorporation. Since Delalande has its principal place of business in NY and eleven plaintiffs are citizens of NY, remand is required.

Feedback: Privacy Policy Feedback
Do Not Sell My Personal Information
About project: SlidePlayer Terms of Service

© 2024 SlidePlayer.com Inc. All rights reserved.