Add to ORKGPlaintiff brought action against defendant railroad in the federal district court for New Jersey district alleging that she was a citizen of New Jersey and that defendant was a corporation and citizen of New York. Defendant moved to dismiss for lack of diversity of citizenship alleging that it was a consolidated corporation of New York and New Jersey. Held, action dismissed. Since corporate existence was dependent upon both states, and plaintiff was also a citizen of one, diversity did not appear. Gavin v. Hudson & Manhattan R. Co., (D.C. N.J.1950) 90 F. Supp. 172
ederal courts control an outsize share of big-ticket corporate litigation. And that control rests, t...
A recent congressional amendment of federal district court jurisdictional requirements for both dive...
Plaintiff, a New York corporation, was trustee under a mortgage deed to secure a bond issue executed...
Plaintiff brought action against defendant railroad in the federal district court for New Jersey dis...
Plaintiff, a New York corporation, brought a stockholder\u27s derivative suit, in federal court, aga...
Plaintiff, a citizen of New York, instituted a stockholder\u27s suit on behalf of a New York corpora...
Plaintiff, a citizen of New York, instituted a stockholder\u27s suit on behalf of a New York corpora...
Plaintiff, a citizen of New Jersey, commenced a personal injury action in the federal district court...
Plaintiff, a New York corporation, was trustee under a mortgage deed to secure a bond issue executed...
Plaintiff, a District of Columbia corporation, sued defendant, a Nebraska corporation, in the Munici...
The question of the citizenship of a foreign corporation as conferring jurisdiction upon a federal c...
Plaintiff, a District of Columbia corporation, sued defendant, a Nebraska corporation, in the Munici...
Since the early 1990s, the U.S. Circuit Courts of Appeals have been divided on how to determine the ...
Plaintiff, a citizen of Pennsylvania, instituted a tort action in a federal district court against a...
After years of pretrial and trial activities, a large corporate defendant discovers that it is a c...
ederal courts control an outsize share of big-ticket corporate litigation. And that control rests, t...
A recent congressional amendment of federal district court jurisdictional requirements for both dive...
Plaintiff, a New York corporation, was trustee under a mortgage deed to secure a bond issue executed...
Plaintiff brought action against defendant railroad in the federal district court for New Jersey dis...
Plaintiff, a New York corporation, brought a stockholder\u27s derivative suit, in federal court, aga...
Plaintiff, a citizen of New York, instituted a stockholder\u27s suit on behalf of a New York corpora...
Plaintiff, a citizen of New York, instituted a stockholder\u27s suit on behalf of a New York corpora...
Plaintiff, a citizen of New Jersey, commenced a personal injury action in the federal district court...
Plaintiff, a New York corporation, was trustee under a mortgage deed to secure a bond issue executed...
Plaintiff, a District of Columbia corporation, sued defendant, a Nebraska corporation, in the Munici...
The question of the citizenship of a foreign corporation as conferring jurisdiction upon a federal c...
Plaintiff, a District of Columbia corporation, sued defendant, a Nebraska corporation, in the Munici...
Since the early 1990s, the U.S. Circuit Courts of Appeals have been divided on how to determine the ...
Plaintiff, a citizen of Pennsylvania, instituted a tort action in a federal district court against a...
After years of pretrial and trial activities, a large corporate defendant discovers that it is a c...
ederal courts control an outsize share of big-ticket corporate litigation. And that control rests, t...
A recent congressional amendment of federal district court jurisdictional requirements for both dive...
Plaintiff, a New York corporation, was trustee under a mortgage deed to secure a bond issue executed...