From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

ELA MEDICAL, INC. v. ARRHYTHMIA MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATES

United States District Court, D. Minnesota
Mar 21, 2007
Civ. No. 06-3580 (JNE/SRN) (D. Minn. Mar. 21, 2007)
Download
PDF
Check
Treatment

Summary

finding that the state court action filed one week before the federal action was likely the product of a race to the courthouse, that the plaintiffs clearly had notice that the defendant was considering suit against them, and denying motion to dismiss the federal case under Colorado River

Summary of this case from IPFS Corp. v. Lopez
See 6 Summaries

Opinion

Civ. No. 06-3580 (JNE/SRN).

March 21, 2007

ORDER

JOAN ERICKSEN, District Judge

This matter is before the Court on a Report and Recommendation issued by the Honorable Susan Richard Nelson, United States Magistrate Judge, on February 22, 2007. The magistrate judge recommended that Defendants' motions to dismiss, transfer, or stay this action be denied. Defendants objected to the magistrate judge's Report and Recommendation, and Plaintiff responded. Based on a de novo review of the record, the Court adopts the Report and Recommendation. Therefore, IT IS ORDERED THAT:

1. Arrhythmia Management Associates, Inc., and Deborah Whitney's Motion to Dismiss, Transfer, or Stay this Action [Docket No. 9] and Amended Motion to Dismiss, Transfer, or Stay this Action [Docket No. 13] are DENIED.
2. Biotronik, Inc.'s Motion to Dismiss, Transfer, or Stay this Action [Docket No. 3] is DENIED.

Summaries of

ELA MEDICAL, INC. v. ARRHYTHMIA MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATES

United States District Court, D. Minnesota
Mar 21, 2007
Civ. No. 06-3580 (JNE/SRN) (D. Minn. Mar. 21, 2007)

finding that the state court action filed one week before the federal action was likely the product of a race to the courthouse, that the plaintiffs clearly had notice that the defendant was considering suit against them, and denying motion to dismiss the federal case under Colorado River

Summary of this case from IPFS Corp. v. Lopez

in ELA Med., Inc. v. Arrhythmia Mgmt. Assocs., Inc., No. 06-cv-3580, 2007 WL 892517, at *6 (D. Minn. Mar. 21, 2007), the third party filed suit and “expressly sought” a declaration of the signatories' rights under the Agreement.

Summary of this case from The Toro Co. v. Sutterlin

In ELA Med., Inc. v. Arrhythmia Mgmt. Assocs., Inc., No. 06-cv-3580 (JNE/SRN), 2007 WL 892517, at *6, (D. Minn. Mar. 21, 2007), this Court enforced a forum selection clause against a non-signatory where the non-signatory defendant-employer and signatory defendant-employee "shared[d] a common interest," and the agreement was closely related to the contractual dispute.

Summary of this case from ResCap Liquidating Tr. v. LendingTree, LLC

relying on fact that new employer had previously "sought a judicial declaration" of rights under the agreement

Summary of this case from Medtronic, Inc. v. Ernst

explaining "common interest" among defendants as an important factor in determining whether to apply the closely-related-party doctrine

Summary of this case from C.H. Robinson Worldwide, Inc. v. Rodriguez

noting common interest among parties as key factor in whether they are "closely related" for purposes of binding non-party to forum-selection clause

Summary of this case from Medtronic, Inc. v. Endologix, Inc.
Case details for

ELA MEDICAL, INC. v. ARRHYTHMIA MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATES

Case Details

Full title:ELA Medical, Inc., Plaintiff, v. Arrhythmia Management Associates, Inc.…

Court:United States District Court, D. Minnesota

Date published: Mar 21, 2007

Citations

Civ. No. 06-3580 (JNE/SRN) (D. Minn. Mar. 21, 2007)

Citing Cases

WinRed, Inc. v. Ellison

Therefore, the Court may take judicial notice of information contained on the website WinRed itself alleges…

The Toro Co. v. Sutterlin

Similarly, in ELA Med., Inc. v. Arrhythmia Mgmt. Assocs., Inc., No. 06-cv-3580, 2007 WL 892517,…

18 Citing Cases