This column reports on several significant, representative decisions handed down recently in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York. Judge Jack B. Weinstein declined to realign a corporate defendant as a plaintiff in a diversity action. Judge Arthur D. Spatt dealt with various issues in connection with a motion to suppress evidence in a criminal case. And Judge Edward R. Korman dismissed an action brought under the Federal Tort Claims Act relating to a murder in Panama.

Motion to Realign Corporation in Derivative Action and Dismiss for Want of Diversity Jurisdiction. In Hebei Tiankai Wood & Land Construction Co., Ltd. v. Frank Chen & Kirin Construction, Inc., 18 CV 2795 (EDNY, Dec. 21, 2018), Judge Weinstein applied the “doctrine of antagonism” to deny realignment, in a derivative action, of a party named as a nominal defendant, where realignment as a plaintiff would have defeated diversity jurisdiction.

This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.

To view this content, please continue to their sites.

Not a Lexis Advance® Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]