Ado Finance, AG v. McDonnell Douglas Corp.

Good Law
931 F. Supp. 711·1996 WL 339850·1996 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 13649
United States District Court, Central District of CaliforniaMay 9, 1996CV-93-2795-KMW (CTx)California4,077 words

Opinion

Opinion

Wardlaw, J.

ORDER DENYING MOTION BY STEIN-BRUGGER AND THE ANSTALTS TO DISMISS FIRST AMENDED COUNTERCLAIM FOR LACK OF PERSONAL JURISDICTION

The Court has considered the Motion To Dismiss First Amended Counterclaim For Lack Of Personal Jurisdiction filed by counterclaim defendants Alfred Steinbrugger (“Steinbrugger”), Anstalt Fur Investition (“AFI”) and Premanda Anstalt (“Premanda”) (AFI and Premanda are collectively referred to as “the Anstalts”) against defendant and counterclaimant McDonnell Douglas Corporation (“MDC”). The Court has read and reviewed all the material filed by the parties in connection with this Motion, and has considered the arguments of counsel at the May 6, 1996 hearing on the Motion. Based upon all the briefs, exhibits, declarations, and other evidence submitted by the parties, the oral argument of counsel, as well as all files and records in this case, the Court is prepared to rule on the Motion and hereby DENIES the Motion in its entirety.

I. BACKGROUND

ADO Finance AG (“ADO”) filed this action on May 13,1993, alleging breach of contract, deceit, negligent misrepresentation, fraud, conversion, mistake, failure of consideration and unjust enrichment regarding its…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.