Bond Leather Co., Inc. v. Q.T. Shoe Mfg. Co., Inc. And Martin S. Nadler, Bond Leather Co., Inc. v. Q.T. Shoe Mfg. Co., Inc., Melvin Nadler, Inc.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• finding that “district court was within its rights” when it “expressly rejected [defendant’s] proffered explanation of its failure to answer”
• finding that mailing four letters and making one telephone call to Massachusetts satisfied the “transacting any business”requirement
• noting that “the district court, familiar with the parties and circumstances, is best situated to weigh the reasons for and against setting aside a default judgment” (internal quotation marks omitted)
• mailing four letters into Massachusetts \evidencing a single guaranty of payment for goods sold\
• mailing four letters to and receiving a telephone call from plaintiff in Massachusetts satisfied section 3(a)
• finding insufficient contacts with forum state despite four letters sent by defendant to plaintiff in forum state

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).