MATTEL, INC.

v.

LOUIS MARX & CO., INC.

Citator

Cited By

• Codex Corp. & Yellow Freight Sys., Inc. v. Milgo Elec. Corp. & Int'l Commc'ns Corp., 553 F.2d 735 (1st Cir. 1977)
  …Massachusetts and Kansas, Massachusetts would clearly be the more convenient forum. Milgo argues that the Kansas action, having been filed earlier, should be preferred. Mattel, Inc. v. Louis Marx & Co., 2 Cir., 1965, 353 F. 2d 421, cert. dismissed, 384 U.S. 948, 86 S.Ct. 1475, 16 L.Ed.2d 546. While the first-filed rule may ordinarily be a prudent one, it is so only because it is sometimes more important that there be a rule than that the rule be particularly sound. Accordingly, an exception to the first-f…
• Columbia Plaza Corp. v. Sec. Nat'l Bank, 525 F.2d 620 (D.C. Cir. 1975)
  …Graybar Elec. Co., supra note 30, 266 F. 2d at 204. . See Food Fair Stores, Inc. v. Square Deal Market, Inc., 88 U.S.App.D.C. 176, 177, 187 F. 2d 219, 220 (1954); Mattel, Inc. v. Louis Marx & Co., 353 F. 2d 421, 424 (2d Cir. 1965), cert. dismissed, 384 U.S. 948, 86 S.Ct. 1475, 16 L.Ed.2d 546 (1966); Remington Prods. Corp. v. American Aerovap, Inc., 192 F. 2d 872, 873 (2d Cir. 1951); Mann Mfg., Inc. v. Hortex, Inc., 439 F. 2d 403, 408 (5th Cir. 1971). . See Crosley Corp. v. Hazeltine Corp., supra note 35,…
• William Gluckin & Co., Inc. v. Int'l Playtex Corp., 407 F.2d 177 (2d Cir. 1969)
  …owing of balance of convenience in favor of the second action,” Remington Products Corp. v. American Aerovap, Inc., 192 F. 2d 872, 873 (2d Cir. 1951), Mattel, Inc. v. Louis Marx & Co., 353 F. 2d 421, 423 (2d Cir. 1965), petition for cert. dismissed, 384 U.S. 948, 86 S.Ct. 1475, 16 L.Ed.2d 546 (1966), or unless there are special circumstances which justify giving priority to the second. Joseph Bancroft & Sons Co. v. Spunize Co. of America, 268 F. 2d 522 (2d Cir. 1959). In deciding between competing jurisdict…