1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. F.Supp.
  4. 712 F.Supp.
  5. 712 F.Supp. 1140 (1989)
 

SCHUR v. PORTER

No. 88 Civ. 3177 (MGC).

712 F.Supp. 1140 (1989)

Lawrence H. SCHUR and Paul E. Schur, Plaintiffs, v. Stephen W. PORTER; Dunnells, Duvall Bennett & Porter; and Van Ness, Feldman, Sutcliffe & Curtis, Defendants.

United States District Court, S.D. New York.

May 30, 1989.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Friedman, Wittenstein & Hochman, New York City, for plaintiffs; by Andrew A. Wittenstein, David J. Nathan, Eric F. Gebaide.

Morgan, Melhuish, Monaghan, Arvidson, Abrutyn & Lisowski by Haydn J. Brill, Thomas Martin, New York City, and Steptoe & Johnson, by Roger E. Warin, Antonia B. Ianniello, Christian M. McBurney, Washington, D.C., for defendants.

OPINION AND ORDER

CEDARBAUM, District Judge.

Defendants Stephen W. Porter, Dunnells, Duvall, Bennett & Porter ("Dunnells") and Van Ness, Feldman, Sutcliffe & Curtis ("Van Ness") move to dismiss this diversity action for lack of personal jurisdiction and improper venue. In addition, defendants move to dismiss the legal malpractice claim on the ground that the claim is barred by the statute of limitations. For the reasons discussed below, defendants...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases