From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Galuska v. Geoquest, Inc.

United States Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit
Dec 9, 1998
172 F.3d 53 (7th Cir. 1998)

Summary

holding that because "the subsequent suit names [the purported transferees] as defendants who [were] not found liable in the first suit . . . the district court's jurisdiction over the first suit does not carry over to a new, independent suit, even when the new suit is brought to enforce a prior federal judgment"

Summary of this case from Michael S. Fox Tr. of Perry H. Koplik & Sons, Inc. v. Koplik (In re Perry H. Koplik & Sons, Inc.)

Opinion

No. 98-1892.

December 9, 1998.

Appeal from the N.D.Ill.


Affirmed.


Summaries of

Galuska v. Geoquest, Inc.

United States Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit
Dec 9, 1998
172 F.3d 53 (7th Cir. 1998)

holding that because "the subsequent suit names [the purported transferees] as defendants who [were] not found liable in the first suit . . . the district court's jurisdiction over the first suit does not carry over to a new, independent suit, even when the new suit is brought to enforce a prior federal judgment"

Summary of this case from Michael S. Fox Tr. of Perry H. Koplik & Sons, Inc. v. Koplik (In re Perry H. Koplik & Sons, Inc.)
Case details for

Galuska v. Geoquest, Inc.

Case Details

Full title:Galuska v. Geoquest, Inc

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit

Date published: Dec 9, 1998

Citations

172 F.3d 53 (7th Cir. 1998)

Citing Cases

Rodriguez v. Lawns of Distinction

In its opposition to plaintiffs' motion for leave to amend, EKM contends that the Court lacks ancillary…

Michael S. Fox Tr. of Perry H. Koplik & Sons, Inc. v. Koplik (In re Perry H. Koplik & Sons, Inc.)

The Epperson court pointed to other courts that have come to similar conclusions. See Thomas, Head and…