Wilderness USA, Inc. v. DeAngelo Brothers LLC
United States District Court for the Western District of New York
265 F. Supp. 3d 301 (2017)
- Written by Serena Lipski, JD
Facts
Wilderness USA, Inc. (Wilderness) (plaintiff), a New York corporation with its principal place of business in New York, had a contract with a general contractor, Mercier, Inc.. Under the contract, Mercier obtained its own contract with the Georgia Department of Transportation (GDOT) to clear vegetation overgrowth from the sides of highways, and Mercier agreed to subcontract with Wilderness to perform the work for the GDOT contract. Mercier was bought by DeAngelo Brothers LLC (DeAngelo) (defendant), a Pennsylvania limited-liability company with a Pennsylvania principal place of business. DeAngelo agreed to maintain Mercier’s GDOT subcontract with Wilderness. A year and a half into their relationship, however, DeAngelo terminated the subcontract with Wilderness, citing material breaches by Wilderness. Alleging that DeAngelo had manufactured the breaches so that DeAngelo could perform the work itself, Wilderness filed a diversity suit against DeAngelo in federal court in New York. DeAngelo moved to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction, among other reasons. Wilderness argued that the court had general jurisdiction over DeAngelo because DeAngelo had registered as a foreign corporation in New York and appointed the New York secretary of state as its agent for service of process, and New York courts had long held that this was sufficient for a court to exercise general jurisdiction over a defendant. DeAngelo argued that a recent United States Supreme Court had invalidated these cases.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Wolford, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 814,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.