Costaras v. NBC Universal, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• “Plaintiffs have failed to demonstrate, or even allege, that [Defendants] regularly engage in any persistent course of conduct in Ohio, thus making (A)(4) inapplicable to them.”
• “The interests of justice would be served by transferring the entire case to a district where all parties may be joined in one suit rather than in severing the claims.”’
• “The interests of justice would be served by transferring the entire case to a district where all parties may be joined in one suit rather than in severing the claims.”’
• “In situations where venue is proper for one defendant but not for another, the court may transfer the entire case to another district that is proper for both defendants or sever the claims.”
• “In situations where venue is proper for one defendant but not for another, the court may transfer the entire case to another district that is proper for both defendants or sever the claims.”
• “In situations where venue is proper for one defendant but not for another, the court may transfer the entire case to another district that is proper for both defendants or sever the claims.” (citing Cottman Transmission Sys., Inc. v. Martino, 36 F.3d 291, 296 (3d Cir. 1994)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).