Visual Sciences, Inc. v. Integrated Communications Inc., No. 1793

CourtUnited States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (2nd Circuit)
Writing for the CourtBefore VAN GRAAFEILAND and KEARSE; VAN GRAAFEILAND
Citation660 F.2d 56
Decision Date21 September 1981
Docket NumberNo. 1793,D
PartiesVISUAL SCIENCES, INC., individually and on behalf of itself and all other stockholders of Integrated Communications Incorporated, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. INTEGRATED COMMUNICATIONS INCORPORATED, Duane C. Harden, Richard Haden, Allen B. Neuendorf, Alan W. Robinson, Allan W. Peddle, and Betacom Corporation, Defendants, Duane C. Harden, Richard Haden, Allen B. Neuendorf and Betacom Corporation, Defendants-Appellants. ocket 81-7456.

Page 56

660 F.2d 56
VISUAL SCIENCES, INC., individually and on behalf of itself
and all other stockholders of Integrated
Communications Incorporated, Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
INTEGRATED COMMUNICATIONS INCORPORATED, Duane C. Harden,
Richard Haden, Allen B. Neuendorf, Alan W.
Robinson, Allan W. Peddle, and Betacom
Corporation, Defendants,
Duane C. Harden, Richard Haden, Allen B. Neuendorf and
Betacom Corporation, Defendants-Appellants.
No. 1793, Docket 81-7456.
United States Court of Appeals,
Second Circuit.
Argued Aug. 11, 1981.
Decided Sept. 21, 1981.

Page 58

Daniel J. Sullivan, New York City (Murray, Hollander, Sullivan & Bass, New York City), for defendants-appellants.

Henry J. Forman, Jr., New York City (Satterlee & Stephens, New York City), for plaintiff-appellee.

Before VAN GRAAFEILAND and KEARSE, Circuit Judges, and MARKEY,C.C.P.A. *

VAN GRAAFEILAND, Circuit Judge:

This is an appeal from an order of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York (Costantino, J.) entered July 13, 1981, granting plaintiff-appellee's motion for a preliminary injunction and denying the motions of defendants-appellants, Duane C. Harden and Betacom Corporation to dismiss the second amended complaint for lack of personal jurisdiction. Because the matter is properly before us on appellants' appeal from the temporary injunction order, we may consider appellants' attack on the district court's order denying their motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction. United States v. First National City Bank, 321 F.2d 14, 17 n.3 (2d Cir. 1963), rev'd on other grounds, 379 U.S. 378, 85 S.Ct. 528, 13 L.Ed.2d 365 (1965).

In the affidavits submitted in support of the parties' several motions, many essential facts were sharply disputed. The parties disagreed as to the existence and nature of an alleged contract between Visual Sciences and defendant Harden. They disagreed as to the purpose of trips by Harden, a citizen of Minnesota, to New York. They also disagreed as to the facts necessary to confer standing on plaintiff to pursue its derivative stockholder's action on behalf of Integrated Communications, Inc. The district court ordered a combined hearing on the motions but terminated it abruptly before defendants had cross-examined plaintiff's witnesses or presented evidence of their own.

On a motion for a preliminary injunction an adequate presentation of the facts is necessary. Where, as here, essential facts are in dispute, there must be a...

To continue reading

Request your trial
124 practice notes
  • Al-Kidd v. Ashcroft, No. 06-36059.
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (9th Circuit)
    • September 4, 2009
    ..."at least a reasonable probability of ultimate success upon the question of jurisdiction." Visual Scis., Inc. v. Integrated Comm., Inc., 660 F.2d 56, 59 (2d Cir.1981) (citation and quotation marks omitted). To rule on the preliminary injunction is necessarily to make a judgment as to the qu......
  • Rolls-Royce Motors, Inc. v. Charles Schmitt & Co., No. 85 Civ. 5078 (PKL).
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 2nd Circuit. United States District Courts. 2nd Circuit. Southern District of New York
    • April 3, 1987
    ...not, at this point, prove jurisdiction by a preponderance of the evidence. See Visual Sciences, Inc. v. Integrated Communications, Inc., 660 F.2d 56, 58 (2d Cir. 1981).28 U.S.C. § 1332.2 657 F. Supp. 1044 Therefore, the issue of personal jurisdiction is determined by the law of the forum st......
  • In re Professional Sales Corp., No. 85 C 5791.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 7th Circuit. United States District Court (Northern District of Illinois)
    • December 16, 1985
    ...of discretion. SEC v. G. Weeks Securities, 678 F.2d 649, 651 (6th Cir.1982); Visual Sciences, Inc. v. Integrated Communications, Inc., 660 F.2d 56, 58 (2d In my earlier opinion vacating Judge Hertz's extension of the TRO, I noted the factual conflicts in this case and indicated that an evid......
  • Beacon Enterprises, Inc. v. Menzies, No. 329
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (2nd Circuit)
    • August 12, 1983
    ...personal jurisdiction. See Marine Midland Bank, N.A. v. Miller, 664 F.2d at 904; Visual Sciences, Inc. v. Integrated Communications Inc., 660 F.2d 56, 58 (2d Cir.1981); United States v. Montreal Trust Co., 358 F.2d 239, 242 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 384 U.S. 919, 86 S.Ct. 1366, 16 L.Ed.2d 44......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
124 cases
  • Al-Kidd v. Ashcroft, No. 06-36059.
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (9th Circuit)
    • September 4, 2009
    ..."at least a reasonable probability of ultimate success upon the question of jurisdiction." Visual Scis., Inc. v. Integrated Comm., Inc., 660 F.2d 56, 59 (2d Cir.1981) (citation and quotation marks omitted). To rule on the preliminary injunction is necessarily to make a judgment as to the qu......
  • Rolls-Royce Motors, Inc. v. Charles Schmitt & Co., No. 85 Civ. 5078 (PKL).
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 2nd Circuit. United States District Courts. 2nd Circuit. Southern District of New York
    • April 3, 1987
    ...not, at this point, prove jurisdiction by a preponderance of the evidence. See Visual Sciences, Inc. v. Integrated Communications, Inc., 660 F.2d 56, 58 (2d Cir. 1981).28 U.S.C. § 1332.2 657 F. Supp. 1044 Therefore, the issue of personal jurisdiction is determined by the law of the forum st......
  • In re Professional Sales Corp., No. 85 C 5791.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 7th Circuit. United States District Court (Northern District of Illinois)
    • December 16, 1985
    ...of discretion. SEC v. G. Weeks Securities, 678 F.2d 649, 651 (6th Cir.1982); Visual Sciences, Inc. v. Integrated Communications, Inc., 660 F.2d 56, 58 (2d In my earlier opinion vacating Judge Hertz's extension of the TRO, I noted the factual conflicts in this case and indicated that an evid......
  • Beacon Enterprises, Inc. v. Menzies, No. 329
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (2nd Circuit)
    • August 12, 1983
    ...personal jurisdiction. See Marine Midland Bank, N.A. v. Miller, 664 F.2d at 904; Visual Sciences, Inc. v. Integrated Communications Inc., 660 F.2d 56, 58 (2d Cir.1981); United States v. Montreal Trust Co., 358 F.2d 239, 242 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 384 U.S. 919, 86 S.Ct. 1366, 16 L.Ed.2d 44......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT