Chebib v. Samaritan Regional Health System

100 F. App'x 836
CourtCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit
DecidedJune 8, 2004
DocketNo. 03-7124
StatusPublished

This text of 100 F. App'x 836 (Chebib v. Samaritan Regional Health System) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Chebib v. Samaritan Regional Health System, 100 F. App'x 836 (D.C. Cir. 2004).

Opinion

JUDGMENT

PER CURIAM.

This appeal was considered on the record from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia and on the briefs filed by the parties. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2); D.C.Cir. Rule 34(j). It is

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the district court’s order filed August 13, 2003 be affirmed, as the district court correctly held that personal jurisdiction was lacking and that venue was improper. See, e.g., International Shoe Co. v. Washington, 326 U.S. 310, 66 S.Ct. 154, 90 L.Ed. 95 (1945); 28 U.S.C. § 1391. We modify the order, however, to reflect that all of appellant’s claims are dismissed without prejudice on the grounds discussed above.

Pursuant to D.C. Circuit Rule 36, this disposition will not be published. The Clerk is directed to withhold issuance of the mandate herein until seven days after disposition of any timely petition for rehearing or petition for rehearing en banc. See Fed. R.App. P. 41(b); D.C.Cir. Rule 41.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

International Shoe Co. v. Washington
326 U.S. 310 (Supreme Court, 1945)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
100 F. App'x 836, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/chebib-v-samaritan-regional-health-system-cadc-2004.