In re the Marriage of Hanna

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that an allegation of successor liability against an entity whose predecessor is subject to personal jurisdiction can provide personal jurisdiction over the successor entity
• holding that trial court 17 did not abuse its discretion in drawing and relying on an adverse inference where other evidence also supported the inference
• concluding that a non- 22 party could not be substituted or joined under Rule 25(c) because the non-party was not a 1 “successor in interest” to the obligations of the party
• stating that an “intervening change in controlling law” can be an appropriate basis for granting a new trial under Rule 59, although an amended judgment is often the preferred correction
• discussing, in the context of Fed.R.Civ.P. 25(c), personal jurisdiction over suceessors-in-interest that are corporate entities
• “Because there is a lack of personal jurisdiction, we do not reach the merits . . .”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).