From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Cozen O'Connor, P.C. v. Fischbein

United States District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
Mar 16, 2010
CIVIL ACTION NO. 09-4931 (E.D. Pa. Mar. 16, 2010)

Summary

finding sufficient minimum contacts based upon at least five letters and one telephone call that were directly related to the loans at issue in the case

Summary of this case from United Dairy, Inc. v. Bayshore Indus., LLC

Opinion

CIVIL ACTION NO. 09-4931.

March 16, 2010


ORDER


AND NOW, this 16th day of March, 2010, upon consideration of the complaint (docket entry # 1), defendant's motion to dismiss pursuant to F.R.C.P. 12(b)(2) and 12(b)(3) or, in the alternative, to transfer venue pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1404 (docket entry # 7), plaintiff's response thereto (docket entry # 13), and defendant's motion for leave to file a reply brief (docket entry # 18), it is hereby ORDERED that:

1. Defendant's motion for leave to file a reply brief (docket entry # 18) is GRANTED;

2. The Clerk of Court shall DOCKET defendant's reply brief, which is attached to his motion for leave to file a reply brief as Exhibit A;

3. Defendant's motion to dismiss (docket entry # 7) is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART;

4. Defendant's motion to dismiss the complaint pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(2) and (12)(b)(3) is DENIED;

5. Defendant's motion to transfer this action to the Southern District of New York is GRANTED;

6. The Clerk of Court shall TRANSFER this matter and all case papers to the Southern District of New York; and

7. The Clerk of Court shall CLOSE this matter statistically.


Summaries of

Cozen O'Connor, P.C. v. Fischbein

United States District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
Mar 16, 2010
CIVIL ACTION NO. 09-4931 (E.D. Pa. Mar. 16, 2010)

finding sufficient minimum contacts based upon at least five letters and one telephone call that were directly related to the loans at issue in the case

Summary of this case from United Dairy, Inc. v. Bayshore Indus., LLC

finding sufficient minimum contacts where defendant directed five letters and one phone call to the forum, all of which “directly related to the subject of th[e] litigation”

Summary of this case from Toussant v. Williams

In O'Connor v. Fischbein, 2010 WL 1053220 (E.D.Pa. March 16, 2010), the defendant was a contracted employee of a Pennsylvania professional corporation (a law firm), but worked in New York.

Summary of this case from Rich v. Housman
Case details for

Cozen O'Connor, P.C. v. Fischbein

Case Details

Full title:COZEN O'CONNOR, P.C. v. RICHARD S. FISCHBEIN

Court:United States District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania

Date published: Mar 16, 2010

Citations

CIVIL ACTION NO. 09-4931 (E.D. Pa. Mar. 16, 2010)

Citing Cases

United Dairy, Inc. v. Bayshore Indus., LLC

COL 19) The Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit has stated that "[m]ail and telephone communications sent…

Toussant v. Williams

Accordingly, the Court cannot here rely on Defendant's minimum contacts with respect to those contracts; the…