S.D. New York· 9/16/1970
Leasco Data Processing Equipment Corp. v. Maxwell
Citations
- 319 F. Supp. 1256
- 1970 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 10229
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- applied minimum contacts test of due process to section 27 of 1934 Exchange Act
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Lasker
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
40 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- Wells Fargo & Co. v. Wells Fargo Express Co.Ninth Circuit· 1977-04-22· cited 321×
- Chrysler Corp. v. Fedders Corp.Sixth Circuit· 1981-03-18· cited 259×
- Leasco Data Processing Equipment Corp. v. MaxwellSecond Circuit· 1972-10-30· cited 194×
- Schaick v. Church of Scientology of California, Inc.D. Massachusetts· 1982-03-26· cited 141×
- Istituto Bancario Italiano SpA v. Hunter Engineering Co.Supreme Court of Delaware· 1982-07-20· cited 122×
- Grove Press, Inc. v. James J. Angleton, William E. Colby and Raymond RoccaSecond Circuit· 1981-09-09· cited 113×
- Oxford First Corp. v. PNC Liquidating Corp.E.D. Pennsylvania· 1974-03-06· cited 99×
- McLaughlin v. CopelandD. Maryland· 1977-06-07· cited 88×
- Mandelkorn v. PatrickDistrict of Columbia· 1973-05-08· cited 70×
- L'Europeenne De Banque v. La Republica De VenezuelaS.D. New York· 1988-10-18· cited 55×
- Securities & Exchange Commission v. National Student Marketing Corp.District of Columbia· 1973-03-22· cited 53×
- Chromium Industries, Inc. v. Mirror Polishing & Plating Co., Inc.N.D. Illinois· 1978-03-15· cited 48×
- Harold Marsh v. William A. Kitchen and Ray T. Zakovich, and United States of AmericaSecond Circuit· 1973-06-18· cited 43×
- Abbate v. AbbateAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York· 1981-07-27· cited 38×
- Dixon v. MacKS.D. New York· 1980-12-10· cited 36×
- Cawley v. BlochD. Maryland· 1982-07-29· cited 31×
- Erving v. Virginia Squires Basketball ClubE.D. New York· 1972-09-19· cited 30×
- Brown Ex Rel. Rhiner v. KerkhoffS.D. Iowa· 2007-08-23· cited 27×
- Hanes Companies, Inc. v. RonsonM.D. North Carolina· 1988-06-07· cited 26×
- National Egg Co. v. Bank Leumi Le-Israel B.M.N.D. Georgia· 1980-11-18· cited 25×
Cites
24 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- International Shoe Co. v. WashingtonSupreme Court· 1945-12-03· cited 18,588×
- Hanson v. DencklaSupreme Court· 1958-10-13· cited 7,025×
- McNutt v. General Motors Acceptance Corp.Supreme Court· 1936-05-18· cited 4,144×
- Bankers Life & Casualty Co. v. HollandSupreme Court· 1953-11-30· cited 826×
- Parke-Bernet Galleries, Inc. v. FranklynNew York Court of Appeals· 1970-01-08· cited 325×
- Perry O. Hooper, as Trustee in Bankruptcy of Consolidated American Industries, Inc. v. Mountain States Securities CorporationFifth Circuit· 1960-09-26· cited 291×
- Hosie v. Chicago & North Western Railway Co.Supreme Court· 1961-02-20· cited 225×
- Schoenbaum v. FirstbrookSecond Circuit· 1968-05-29· cited 148×
- Bertha Building Corporation v. National Theatres Corporation, Gumbiner Theatrical Enterprises, Inc. v. National Theatres CorporationSecond Circuit· 1957-11-07· cited 79×
- Thiele v. ShieldsS.D. New York· 1955-03-31· cited 63×
- Unicon Management Corp. v. Koppers CompanyS.D. New York· 1966-02-07· cited 32×
- Levin v. Great Western Sugar CompanyD. New Jersey· 1967-09-29· cited 31×
- Schenin v. Micro Copper Corp.S.D. New York· 1967-07-12· cited 29×
- H. L. Moore Drug Exchange, Inc. v. Smith, Kline & French LaboratoriesSecond Circuit· 1967-10-05· cited 25×
- Wharton v. RothE.D. New York· 1964-12-22· cited 15×
- Securities and Exchange Commission v. BriggsN.D. Ohio· 1964-10-19· cited 13×
- Ferraioli v. CantorS.D. New York· 1966-06-14· cited 12×
- Newmark v. AbeelS.D. New York· 1952-03-03· cited 11×
- Dauphin Corporation v. DavisD. Delaware· 1962-01-23· cited 11×
- Orient Mid-East Lines, Inc. v. Albert E. Bowen, Inc.S.D. New York· 1969-02-24· cited 10×
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.