Gulf Insurance Company v. David Glasbrenner and Susan Glasbrenner, the Caldor Corporation F/k/a Caldor, Inc., Docket No. 04-0070-Cv

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that “Section 1391(b)(2) does not restrict venue to the district in which the ‘most substantial’ events or omissions giving rise to a claim occurred.”
• noting that “[i]t would be error, for instance, to treat the venue statute’s ‘substantial part’ test as mirroring the minimum contacts test employed in personal jurisdiction inquiries”
• noting that “[i]t would be error, for instance, to treat the venue statute’s ‘substantial part’ test as mirroring the minimum contacts test employed in personal jurisdiction inquiries”
• recognizing that while 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b)(2
• finding that, because the “essence of the suit” was whether defendants breached the insurance contract, venue would be appropriate in the Southern District of New York if plaintiff could prove that policy was “negotiated, approved, and executed” within the district
• observing, in dicta, that the original injury was a substantial event for purposes of the venue analysis when an insurance company sought a declaratory judgment that the injury was not covered by the insurance policy

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).