Apex Electrical Mfg. Co. v. Sears, Roebuck Co.

1 Citing case

  1. Glenn v. Trans World Airlines, Inc.

    210 F. Supp. 31 (E.D.N.Y. 1962)   Cited 10 times
    In Glenn, the public administrator represented the mother of the decedent (Kmetty), a citizen and resident of Hungary, and a decedent named Kiss.

    The existence of a pending action involving the same parties and subject matter in the district to which a transfer is sought has been the basis of a transfer order in several cases. United States v. Kraft Foods Co., 146 F. Supp. 132 (E.D.Pa. 1956); A/S Dampskibsselskabet Svendbord v. United States, 116 F. Supp. 603 (E.D.Tex. 1953); Aircraft Marine Prod., Inc. v. Burndy Engineering Co., 96 F. Supp. 588 (S.D.Cal. 1951); Apex Electrical Mfg. Co. v. Sears Roebuck Co., 87 F. Supp. 533 (S.D. Ohio 1949); but it is not necessarily decisive Leopard Roofing Co. v. Asphalt Roofing Industrial Bureau, 190 F. Supp. 726 (E.D.Tenn. 1960) (no possibility of consolidation with pending action); Anschell v. Sackheim, 145 F. Supp. 447 (D.N.J. 1956) (action could not have been brought against all defendants in transferee district); Rederiaktierbolaget v. Compania De Navegacion "Anne" S.A., 124 F. Supp. 118 (S.D.N Y 1954) (inadequate security in transferee district).