§Why CasetextPricing

F5 Capital v. Petros Pappas et al

REPLY MEMORANDUM OF LAW in Support re: 49 MOTION to Dismiss . /Certain Defendants' Reply Memorandum of Law in Further Support of their Additional Motion to Dismiss the Complaint for Lack of Personal Jurisdiction and Insufficient Service of Process. Document

17 Cited authorities

  1. Daimler AG v. Bauman

    571 U.S. 117 (2014)   Cited 5,969 times   238 Legal Analyses
    Holding that foreign corporations may not be subject to general jurisdiction "whenever they have an in-state subsidiary or affiliate"

  2. Jazini ex rel. Jazini v. Nissan Motor Co.

    148 F.3d 181 (2d Cir. 1998)   Cited 713 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "conclusory non-fact-specific jurisdictional allegations" and "legal conclusion couched as a factual allegation" do not meet the burden of a prima facie showing of jurisdiction

  3. O'Neill v. Asat Trust Reg.

    714 F.3d 659 (2d Cir. 2013)   Cited 405 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "conclusory" allegations are "insufficient for specific personal jurisdiction purposes"

  4. Parfi Holding v. Mirror Image

    817 A.2d 149 (Del. 2002)   Cited 175 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that clause requiring arbitration of all disputes “arising out of or in connection with” the contract was broad in scope

  5. Montalbano v. Easco Hand Tools

    766 F.2d 737 (2d Cir. 1985)   Cited 149 times
    Holding that Rule 4(j)'s exemption for service in foreign countries did not apply where service under Rule 4 was never attempted

  6. Casville Invs., Ltd. v. Kates

    No. 12 Civ. 6968 (RA) (S.D.N.Y. Jul. 8, 2013)   Cited 64 times

    No. 12 Civ. 6968 (RA) 07-08-2013 CASVILLE INVESTMENTS, LTD., et al., Plaintiffs, v. JASON KATES, et al., Defendants. Ronnie Abrams OPINION AND ORDER RONNIE ABRAMS, United States District Judge: Plaintiffs Casville Investments, Ltd., MBC Investment SA and Watkins International, Ltd. (collectively, "Plaintiffs") bring this action on behalf of themselves and derivatively on behalf of Argo Digital Solutions, Inc. ("Argo") against Defendants Jason Kates, Richard Sullivan, David Loppert, World Capital

  7. A.W.L.I. Grp. Inc. v. Amber Freight Shipping Lines

    828 F. Supp. 2d 557 (E.D.N.Y. 2011)   Cited 54 times
    Holding that plaintiff failed to establish jurisdiction over the defendant under section 302 where the plaintiff did not "allege any connection between property in New York State and the claimed injury"

  8. Otk Assocs., LLC v. Friedman

    85 A.3d 696 (Del. Ch. 2014)   Cited 27 times
    Finding it reasonably conceivable that "[d]espite not owning a mathematical majority of the Company's common stock, [the defendant] held a combination of securities and contract rights that, together with [the defendant's] board representation and close relationships with management, gave [the defendant] effective control over [the company]."

  9. Barrett v. Tema Development (1988), Inc.

    463 F. Supp. 2d 423 (S.D.N.Y. 2006)   Cited 30 times
    Holding defendant's contacts with New York, which included entering into a contract with a New York resident, attending a single meeting in New York where the contract was discussed, holding a New York bank account, which was referenced in the contract, and using a New York law firm to negotiate an investment deal outside of New York that allegedly arose out of the contract, were insufficient to confer personal jurisdiction over defendant pursuant to CPLR § 302

  10. APA Excelsior III L.P. v. Premiere Technologies, Inc.

    49 F. Supp. 2d 664 (S.D.N.Y. 1999)   Cited 36 times
    Finding transfer appropriate where Defendant's headquarters and most of the relevant documents were in transferee forum

  11. Rule 12 - Defenses and Objections: When and How Presented; Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings; Consolidating Motions; Waiving Defenses; Pretrial Hearing

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 12   Cited 358,269 times   949 Legal Analyses
    Granting the court discretion to exclude matters outside the pleadings presented to the court in defense of a motion to dismiss

  12. Rule 4 - Summons

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 4   Cited 72,489 times   129 Legal Analyses
    Holding that if defendant is not served within 90 days after the complaint is filed, the court—on a motion, or on its own following notice to the plaintiff—must dismiss the action without prejudice against that defendant or order that service be made by a certain time

  13. Section 5-1402 - Choice of forum

    N.Y. Gen. Oblig. Law § 5-1402   Cited 82 times   3 Legal Analyses

    1. Notwithstanding any act which limits or affects the right of a person to maintain an action or proceeding, including, but not limited to, paragraph (b) of section thirteen hundred fourteen of the business corporation law and subdivision two of section two hundred-b of the banking law, any person may maintain an action or proceeding against a foreign corporation, non-resident, or foreign state where the action or proceeding arises out of or relates to any contract, agreement or undertaking for