Maridolo Navegacion, S.A. v. New Jersey Exp. Marine Carpenters Inc, 578 F.2d 1368 (2d Cir. 1978). · Go Syfert
Maridolo Navegacion, S.A. v. New Jersey Exp. Marine Carpenters Inc, 578 F.2d 1368 (2d Cir. 1978). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
“mjere solicitation of in-state sales and delivery pursuant thereto do not constitute doing business within the meaning of 1312.”
87 citation events (3 in the last 25 years) across 21 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Oliver Promotions Lted. v. Tams-Witmark Music Library, Inc. (nysd, 1982-03-31)
Treatment trajectory · 1978 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1978 2002 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 7 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (quoted) Oliver Promotions Lted. v. Tams-Witmark Music Library, Inc.
S.D.N.Y. · 1982 · signal: see · quote attribution · 1 verbatim quote · confidence high
mjere solicitation of in-state sales and delivery pursuant thereto do not constitute doing business within the meaning of 1312.
discussed Cited "see" Evans v. State of Conn.
D. Conn. · 1997 · signal: see · confidence high
See, Carey, 711 F.2d at 1146 (citing Kane v. Martin Paint Stores, Inc., 439 F.Supp. 1054, 1056 (S.D.N.Y.1977) (10% cut), aff'd mem., 578 F.2d 1368 (2d Cir.1978); Ross v. Saltmarsh, 521 F.Supp. 753, 761-62 (S.D.N.Y.1981) (5% and 10% cuts), aff'd mem., 688 F.2d 816 (2d Cir.1982)).
discussed Cited "see" International Distribution Centers, Inc. v. Walsh Trucking Co.
S.D.N.Y. · 1986 · signal: see · confidence high
See Kane v. Martin Paint, 439 F.Supp. 1054 (S.D.N.Y.1977), aff 'd, 578 F.2d 1368 (2d Cir.1978); *739 Pitchford Scientific Instruments Corp. v. Pepi, Inc., 440 F.Supp. 1175, 1179 , (W.D.Pa.1977), aff 'd, 582 F.2d 1275 (3rd Cir.1978), cer t. denied, 440 U.S. 981 , 99 S.Ct. 1790 , 60 L.Ed.2d 242 (1979).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Hydro Investors, Inc. v. Trafalgar Power Inc.
2d Cir. · 2000 · signal: see, e.g. · confidence low
See, e.g., Manhattan Fuel Co. v. New England Petroleum Corp., 439 F.Supp. 959, 971 (S.D.N.Y.1977), aff'd 578 F.2d 1368 (2d Cir.1978) (calculating interest per month based on when the action for damages accrued); Falcone v. EDO Corp., 141 A.D.2d 498, 500 , 529 N.Y.S.2d 123 (N.Y.App.Div.1988) (computing interest under § 5001(b) from a “reasonable date”).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Hydro Investors, Inc., Plaintiff-Counter-Defendant-Appellant, Lawrence Taft, Plaintiff-Counter-Defendant v. Trafalgar Power Inc., Marina Development, Inc., and Arthur Steckler, Defendants-Counter-Claimants-Appellees. Trafalgar Power Inc., Plaintiff-Appellee-Cross-Appellant v. Neal Dunlevy and Stetson-Harza Corp., Defendants-Appellants-Cross-Appellees
2d Cir. · 2000 · signal: see, e.g. · confidence low
See, e.g., Manhattan Fuel Co. v. New England Petroleum Corp., 439 F. Supp. 959, 971 (S.D.N.Y. 1977), aff'd 578 F.2d 1368 (2d Cir. 1978) (calculating interest per month based on when the action for damages accrued); Falcone v. EDO Corp., 141 A.D.2d 498, 500 (N.Y.
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Grosset & Dunlap, Inc. v. Gulf & Western Corp.
S.D.N.Y. · 1982 · signal: see, e.g. · confidence low
See, e.g., Kane v. Martin Paint Stores, Inc., 439 F.Supp. 1054 (S.D.N.Y.1977), aff'd mem., 578 F.2d 1368 (2d Cir. 1978).” The Court received a supplemental affidavit and exhibits in response to its request.
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Ross v. Saltmarsh
S.D.N.Y. · 1981 · signal: see, e.g. · confidence low
See, e. g., Kane v. Martin Paint Stores, Inc., 439 F.Supp. 1054, 1057 (S.D.N.Y.1977), aff’d without opinion, 578 F.2d 1368 (2d Cir. 1978) (ten percent reduction imposed); see also Fischer v. International Tel. and Tel.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Maridolo Navegacion, S.A.
v.
New Jersey Export Marine Carpenters Inc
77-7538.
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.
Jun 1, 1978.
578 F.2d 1368

578 F.2d 1368

Maridolo Navegacion, S.A.
v.
New Jersey Export Marine Carpenters Inc.

No. 77-7538

United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit

6/1/78

1

S.D.N.Y.

2

AFFIRMED[*]

*

Oral opinion delivered in open court in the belief that no jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion. An oral opinion or a summary order is not citable as precedent. Local Rule Sec. 0.23