§Why CasetextPricing

Mercury Public Affairs, LLC v. Airbus Defence and Space, S.A.U.

MEMORANDUM OF LAW in Support re: 14 MOTION to Dismiss the Complaint. . Document

21 Cited authorities

  1. Daimler AG v. Bauman

    571 U.S. 117 (2014)   Cited 5,609 times   236 Legal Analyses
    Holding that foreign corporations may not be subject to general jurisdiction "whenever they have an in-state subsidiary or affiliate"

  2. Burger King Corp. v. Rudzewicz

    471 U.S. 462 (1985)   Cited 16,817 times   46 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a defendant has "fair warning" if he purposefully directs his activities at residents of the forum and if the litigation results from alleged injuries arising out of or relating to those activities.

  3. Moses H. Cone Hosp. v. Mercury Constr. Corp.

    460 U.S. 1 (1983)   Cited 11,894 times   47 Legal Analyses
    Holding stay order appealable under § 1291 where it put the litigant "effectively out of court," and "surrender[ed] jurisdiction of a federal suit to a state court"

  4. World-Wide Volkswagen Corp. v. Woodson

    444 U.S. 286 (1980)   Cited 10,825 times   32 Legal Analyses
    Holding that an Oklahoma court could not exercise personal jurisdiction over a car retailer when the retailer's only connection to Oklahoma was the fact that a car sold in New York became involved in an accident in Oklahoma

  5. Buckeye Check Cashing v. Cardegna

    546 U.S. 440 (2006)   Cited 1,973 times   33 Legal Analyses
    Holding that nothing necessarily prevents a court from finding an arbitration clause unenforceable in a contract that it later finds is enforceable

  6. Lincoln Prop. v. Roche

    546 U.S. 81 (2005)   Cited 1,879 times
    Holding that because the plaintiffs did not name as a defendant a party who had an interest in the action, the defendant need not have alleged that party's citizenship upon removal

  7. Dean Witter Reynolds Inc. v. Byrd

    470 U.S. 213 (1985)   Cited 3,315 times   20 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the word "shall" in a separate section of the FAA constituted a mandate to the district court

  8. Int'l Shoe Co. v. Washington

    326 U.S. 310 (1945)   Cited 22,573 times   109 Legal Analyses
    Holding that states may exercise personal jurisdiction over out-of-state defendants with "certain minimum contacts with [the forum] such that the maintenance of the suit does not offend ‘traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice’ " (quoting Milliken v. Meyer , 311 U.S. 457, 463, 61 S.Ct. 339, 85 L.Ed. 278 (1940) )

  9. Metropolitan Life Ins. v. Robertson-Ceco Corp.

    84 F.3d 560 (2d Cir. 1996)   Cited 1,381 times
    Holding that dismissal was appropriate where no witnesses or other evidence were located in Vermont, neither party was a resident, and "Florida, the locus of the alleged tort . . . ha far more significant interest[] in resolving the dispute"

  10. Best Van Lines v. Walker

    490 F.3d 239 (2d Cir. 2007)   Cited 736 times
    Holding that we proceed to the constitutional prong of the analysis "[i]f, but only if" we conclude that there is a statutory basis for personal jurisdiction

  11. Section 1332 - Diversity of citizenship; amount in controversy; costs

    28 U.S.C. § 1332   Cited 111,248 times   572 Legal Analyses
    Holding district court has jurisdiction over action between diverse citizens "where the matter in controversy exceeds the sum or value of $75,000"