Lightner v. Pilgrim Paper Corp.
| Decision Date | 26 June 1957 |
| Citation | 152 F. Supp. 504 |
| Parties | Richard A. LIGHTNER, Plaintiff, v. PILGRIM PAPER CORP., a corporation of Pennsylvania and Irving Jacklin and Seymour Jackowitz, Defendants. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Southern District of New York |
Baker, Garber & Chazen, Hoboken, N. J., Bernard Chazen, Hoboken, N. J., of counsel, for plaintiff.
Barry, Treanor, Shandell & Brophy, New York City, Joseph J. Brophy, New York City, of counsel, for defendant Pilgrim Paper Corp., appearing specially for purposes of this motion and for no other purpose.
The defendant Pilgrim Paper Corp. has moved to dismiss this action on the ground that this court has no jurisdiction of such corporate defendant since it is not doing business within the State of New York or within the Southern District of New York.
Prior to the making of the present motion, the defendants, including Pilgrim Paper Corp., stated that they appeared specially for the purpose of a motion which they made for an order, among other things, "transferring the venue of this action from the United States District Court, Southern District of New York, to the appropriate District Court of the United States in Pennsylvania, pursuant to 28 U.S.C.A., Section 1404, Subdivision (a)" and for an extension of the time for said corporate defendant to appear and answer. The motion to transfer venue was denied. The defendant was given twenty days to answer or move with respect to the complaint, and the order denying the motion to transfer stated that it was made without prejudice to the defendants to make any other motion directed to the complaint.
The jurisdictional facts with respect to the corporate defendant as elicited from a deposition of its president, Irving Jacklin, are as follows:
The Pilgrim Paper Corp. was incorporated in Pennsylvania and has its main office and plant in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. It is engaged in the business of jobbing in paper, that is, buying paper and reselling it, buying corrugated cartons, tissue paper, sealing paper, etc., and reselling the same. It has four or five employees in the Philadelphia plant, two in the office and three salesmen.
Jacklin resides in Great Neck, Long Island, New York. He is consulted on hiring and firing; he tells the plant where to order its merchandise; he gives instructions to the plant, which he visits perhaps three or four times a year, mainly for "criticism," spending just a few hours each visit. Seymour Jackowitz, his brother, is vice president and secretary, living in Woodmere, Long Island, New York, and going to Philadelphia no more than the president, with like stays and purposes.
In New York City, Irving Jacklin, Seymour Jackowitz and Armand Lewin operate Merchant Suppliers Company (hereinafter called "Merchant"), a partnership, at 447 West 18 Street. This partnership engages in a similar business to Pilgrim, handling the same type of items as Pilgrim, but it manufactures none of its items in New York. Fifty per cent of Pilgrim's supplies come from Merchant and fifty per cent from other sources.
Irving Jacklin makes the "set ups" and the Philadelphia plant purchases according to his instructions originating from New York. When Pilgrim's "perpetual inventory" of stock runs low it calls New York, and Merchant sends the needed items by truck from its supplies.
Pilgrim has a checking account in a Philadelphia bank. It has no certificate to do business in New York and its accounts are cared for by a New York accounting firm, which works both in Philadelphia and New York and which serves both Pilgrim and Merchant. When in New York, as Jacklin said, the accountants "do it down in Pilgrim and at the Merchant Suppliers." Jacklin receives a copy of all Pilgrim sales and keeps a file of these at 447 West 18 Street, where he looks them over and decides...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Kane v. Central American Mining & Oil, Inc.
...28 333 U.S. at 817, 68 S.Ct. at 866. 29 See S. E. C. v. Minas De Artemisa, 150 F.2d 215 (9th Cir. 1945). Cf. Lightner v. Pilgrim Paper Corp., 152 F.Supp. 504 (S.D.N.Y.1957); Pickthall v. Anaconda Copper Mining Co., 73 F.Supp. 694 (S.D. N.Y.1947). Industrial Waxes, Inc. v. International Rys.......
-
Belk v. Belk's Dept. Store of Columbia, S. C., Inc.
...576, 96 S.E.2d 731; Harrington v. Craft Steel Products, Inc., 244 N.C. 675, 94 S.E.2d 803; Lambert v. Schell, supra; Lightner v. Pilgrim Paper Corp., D.C., 152 F.Supp. 504; Perkins v. Benguet Consol. Min. Co., 158 Ohio St. 145, 107 N.E.2d 203; Moe v. Stearns, D.C., 288 F. 992; Johnson v. At......
-
Industrial Waxes, Inc. v. International Rys. of Cent. Amer.
...within the District is a significant factor in determining corporate presence here, it is but one factor. See Lightner v. Pilgrim Paper Corp., D.C.S.D.N.Y. 1957, 152 F.Supp. 504; Shedd v. Willys Motors, Inc., D.C.S.D.N.Y.1956, 143 F. Supp. 391; General Elec. Co. v. Central Transit Warehouse......
-
East Rutherford Syringes v. OMEGA PRE. MED. INST. CO.
... ... v. Cary, 147 U.S. 623, 13 S.Ct. 472, 37 L.Ed. 307; Paramount Publix Corp. v. American Tri-Ergon Corp., 294 U.S. 464, 55 S.Ct. 449, 79 L.Ed. 997; ... ...