Federal Rules Of Civil Procedure Rule 4(D)(7)

15 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count · browse and sort

• Terry v. Raymond Int'l, Inc.
  658 F.2d 398· 5th Cir.· 1981-10-08 ·cited 37×
  The court held that the district court had personal jurisdiction over Manitowoc, that Louisiana law correctly applied to apportion liability, and that the jury's verdict was supported by evidence, but interest should be awarded from the date of judicial demand.
• Hamilton Life Ins. Co. OF NEW York v. Republic Nat'l Life Ins. Co.
  408 F.2d 606· 2d Cir.· 1969-03-12 ·cited 37×
  The court held that the Federal Arbitration Act applies to insurance contracts and that a party's consent to arbitration in New York confers personal jurisdiction, even if service of process occurred elsewhere.
• Black v. Acme Mkts., Inc.
  564 F.2d 681· 5th Cir.· 1977-12-09 ·cited 34×
  The court held that a federal antitrust claim can be served under the Texas long-arm statute and that substantial purchases within Texas constitute transacting business for venue purposes under the Clayton Act.
• Hicklin v. Edwards
  226 F.2d 410· 8th Cir.· 1955-10-28 ·cited 22×
  A default judgment is void if the defendant was not properly served, and Rule 60(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure requires relief from such judgments, regardless of state law on the conclusiveness of an officer's return.
• Zuckerman v. McCULLEY
  170 F.2d 1015· 8th Cir.· 1948-12-14 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the plaintiff's claim against the estate was barred by Missouri's one-year statute of limitations for exhibiting demands, as the filing of the complaint did not constitute a legally exhibited claim under state law. The appeal from the order quashing service wa
• ARO Mfg. Co., Inc. v. Auto. Body Research Corp.
  352 F.2d 400· 1st Cir.· 1965-11-09 ·cited 19×
  The court held that service of process was insufficient to establish jurisdiction over the defendant corporation in Massachusetts.
• Elec. Equip. Co., Inc. v. Daniel Hamm Drayage Co.
  217 F.2d 656· 8th Cir.· 1954-12-22 ·cited 18×
  A foreign corporation that conducts substantial business activities within a state, even if those activities have ceased before service of process, is subject to jurisdiction in that state for causes of action arising from that business.
• The Purdy Co. v. Argentina
  333 F.2d 95· 7th Cir.· 1964-06-11 ·cited 16×
  Service of process on a foreign consul does not confer in personam jurisdiction over the sovereign state, nor does an isolated commercial transaction involving an Illinois bank and consular authentication constitute 'transacting business' in Illinois for extraterritorial service.
• S.S. Philippine Jose Abad Santos & Nat'l Dev. Co. v. Bannister
  335 F.2d 595· 5th Cir.· 1964-07-16 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the Louisiana Watercraft Statute, allowing substituted service on the Secretary of State for non-resident vessel owners, is constitutional and applicable in admiralty cases.
• Kokomo Opalescent Glass Co., Inc. v. Arthur W. Schmid Int'l, Inc.
  371 F.2d 208· 7th Cir.· 1966-11-30 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the defendant's activities in Indiana were sufficient to establish minimum contacts for valid service of process under the state's long-arm statute, and that the defendant breached its contract by failing to deliver an operable machine within the agreed timefr
• Hartley v. Sioux City & New Orleans Barge Lines, Inc.
  379 F.2d 354· 3d Cir.· 1967-01-27 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the phrase 'action arising within this Commonwealth' in the Pennsylvania statute requires the cause of action to have arisen from events occurring within Pennsylvania, not merely that the action was filed there.
• United States v. Mollenhauer Labs., Inc.
  267 F.2d 260· 7th Cir.· 1959-06-03 ·cited 6×
  The court held that service of process on a corporation's president's instruction to a clerk at a separate business was insufficient under Rule 4(d)(3).
• Thompson v. King
  523 F. Supp. 180· M.D. Fla.· 1981-09-10 ·cited 5×
  The court held that personal jurisdiction over the defendant was established because the plaintiff's allegation of a contractual promise to make payment in Florida, if proven, satisfied Florida's long-arm statute and constitutional due process requirements.
• Pavlovscak v. Lewis
  274 F.2d 523· 3d Cir.· 1959-09-18 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the prior decision regarding the suability and service of process for the United Mine Workers of America Welfare and Retirement Fund was correct, despite a modification in the legal rationale by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court.
• Francisco Salvador Ramon E. Garcia Pujol v. The United States Life Ins. Co.
  396 F.2d 430· 1st Cir.· 1968-06-13 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the district court should have an opportunity to consider whether the defendant engages in sufficient business activities in Puerto Rico to be subject to its jurisdiction, even if the cause of action did not arise there.