Dodenhoff v. United Fruit Co.

74 F. Supp. 284, 1947 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2070
CourtDistrict Court, S.D. New York
DecidedJuly 14, 1947
StatusPublished

This text of 74 F. Supp. 284 (Dodenhoff v. United Fruit Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, S.D. New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Dodenhoff v. United Fruit Co., 74 F. Supp. 284, 1947 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2070 (S.D.N.Y. 1947).

Opinion

BONDY, District Judge.

The plaintiff is an alien, residing in Hoboken, New Jersey. The defendant is incorporated under the laws of the State of New Jersey. The injuries were sustained' and the cause of action arose in Hoboken, New Jersey. It however appears by affidavit that defendant has obtained a certificate authorizing it to do business in this State and has designated an agent, upon whom process against it may be served, in this district. No facts as to inconvenience or otherwise have been presented which would justify the court to decline jurisdiction. See Neirbo Co. v. Bethlehem Corp., 308 U.S. 165, 60 S.Ct. 153, 84 L.Ed. 167, 128 A.L.R. 1437; Da Cunha v. Grasselli Chemical Co., D.C., 46 F.Supp. 28. The court still believes that the denial of the motion upon the argument was proper.

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

Related

Neirbo Co. v. Bethlehem Shipbuilding Corp.
308 U.S. 165 (Supreme Court, 1939)
Da Cunha v. Grasselli Chemical Co.
46 F. Supp. 28 (D. New Jersey, 1942)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
74 F. Supp. 284, 1947 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2070, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dodenhoff-v-united-fruit-co-nysd-1947.