SHAHMOON INDUSTRIES, INC., APPELLANT,
v.
LOUIS G. IMPERATO

3d Cir. | 1965-11-10
No. 14808
351 F.2d 954 United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit (1965) Positive Treatment
Cited by 1 case

AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.


Holding

The court held that diversity jurisdiction was properly established on remand, and found no error in the proceedings below.


Facts & Procedural History

Plaintiff sued defendant for fraud and breach of fiduciary relationship concerning a secret process. The case was previously remanded to establish div…

The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.


Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

As we stated the first time this case was before us, this is an action for fraud and breach of fiduciary relationship, brought by the plaintiff-appellant, Shah-moon Industries, Inc., formerly known as Warren Foundry and Pipe Corp. The basis for the action against Imperato, the defendant, lies in Imperato’s activities as consultant for Shahmoon in developing and exploiting a secret process developed by Imperato for the blocking of iron ore In order to make it suitable for use in the steel industry. Jurisdiction is asserted to be based on diversity of citizenship. See 338 F. 2d 449, 450.

The case is now before us for the second time. At the first argument we raised sua sponte Shahmoon Industries, Inc.’s failure to allege the necessary jurisdictional facts as to its principal place of business. See Rule 8(a) (1) Fed.R.Civ.Proe., and Section 1332(c), Title 28 U.S.C. We remanded the case for further proceedings to the end that the necessary jurisdictional facts might be established. See 338 F. 2d at 452.

Upon the remand the court below supplemented the original record and made findings, based on adequate evidence, and conclusions which establish diversity jurisdiction.

We have examined the record and have considered carefully the arguments of the parties. We can perceive no error in the proceedings below. Accordingly the judgment will be affirmed.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw