Case Resources
Search this Case
in Google Scholar
on the Web
Google Web Search
MSN Web Search
Yahoo! Web Search
in the News
Google News Search
Google News Archive Search
Yahoo! News Search
in the Blogs
BlawgSearch.com Search
Google Blog Search
Technorati Blog Search
in other Databases
Google Book Search
Justia Research Resources
Justia.com
Supreme Court Center
US Regulation Tracker
US District Court Opinions
Federal District Court Civil Case Filings
Legal Blog Search
Legal Podcast Search
USA Constitution Annotated
Online Research Resources
Cornell LII
Cornell Wex Dictionary & Encyclopedia
LLRX.com - Legal Research
Expert Witness Directory
Nolo Consumer & Business
US Court Forms
WashLaw Directory
World LII
Cases Provided By
Creative Commons
public.resource.org
Linda Boysen, Appellant in No. 71-1730, and Joseph Donahue v. Treadway Inn of Lake Harmony, Inc., Ind. and T/a Split Rock Lodge v. Joseph Donahue, Appellant in No. 71-1731, (plaintiff),third-party Defendant
United States Court of Appeals, - 463 F.2d 247
Ralph D. Friedman, Zarwin, Baum, Arangio & Somerson, Philadelphia, Pa., for appellant.
Harry A. Short, Jr., Liebert, Harvey, Herting, Short & Lavin, Philadelphia, Pa., for appellee.
Before STALEY, VAN DUSEN and ADAMS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
This appeal challenges the district court Memorandum and Order, 53 F.R.D. 96, granting defendant's motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction on the ground that the defendant corporation's principal place of business is located in Pennsylvania and hence that diversity of citizenship is lacking. The complaint failed to make any allegation concerning the principal place of business of the defendant corporation, as required by Wymard v. McCloskey & Co., 342 F.2d 495, 497 (3d Cir. 1965). The Memorandum of the district court carefully and correctly summarizes the strong evidence establishing that the principal place of business of the defendant resort hotel is in Carbon County, Pennsylvania. See Kelly v. United States Steel Corporation, 284 F.2d 850 (3d Cir. 1960).
The judgment of the district court will be affirmed.