Continental Graphics v. Hiller Industries, Inc.

2 Citing cases

  1. REISS v. SOCIETE CENTRALE DU GROUPE, ASSURANCES NATIONALES

    185 F. Supp. 2d 335 (S.D.N.Y. 2002)   Cited 3 times

    Likewise, performance of, or payment for, the finder's fee contractual obligation, as alleged by Reiss, might support jurisdiction under the third clause of § 1605(a)(2). See also Continental Graphics, Div. of Republic Corp. v. Hiller Industries, Inc., 614 F. Supp. 1125 (D. Utah 1985).

  2. Fslic v. Provo Excelsior Ltd.

    664 F. Supp. 1405 (D. Utah 1987)   Cited 7 times
    Finding "seller" under the Utah Act to be identical to "seller" under § 12

    In addition, the trend of authority is that if personal jurisdiction is obtained pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 78aa, personal jurisdiction will also be present for all state claims that properly can be considered to be pendent.See Semegen v. Weidner, 780 F.2d 727, 730 (9th Cir. 1985); F.T.C. v. Jim Walter Corp., 651 F.2d 251, 256 (5th Cir. 1981); Mariash v. Morrill, 496 F.2d 1138, 1143 (2nd Cir. 1974); Ruggieri v. General Well Service, Inc., 535 F. Supp. 525, 535 (D.Colo. 1982); see also Contintental Graphics v. Hiller Industries, 614 F. Supp. 1125, 1129-30 (D.Utah 1985) (discussing the sufficiency of contacts with the United States so as to satisfy due process in the context of the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act).See Internat'l Controls Corp. v. Vesco, 593 F.2d 166, 175 n. 5 (2nd Cir. 1979); Oetiker v. Werke, 556 F.2d 1, 4-5 (D.C. Cir. 1977); Robinson v. Penn Central Co., 484 F.2d 553, 555 (3rd Cir. 1973); see generally 4 C. Wright A. Miller, FEDERAL PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE ¶ 1125 at 522-29 (1969) (citing cases).