35 Cited authorities

Ashcroft v. Iqbal
556 U.S. 662 (2009) Cited 269,029 times 281 Legal Analyses
Holding that courts are not required "to credit a complaint's conclusory statements without reference to its factual context"
Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly
550 U.S. 544 (2007) Cited 281,939 times 369 Legal Analyses
Holding that allegations of conduct that are merely consistent with wrongdoing do not state a claim unless "placed in a context that raises a suggestion of" such wrongdoing
Daimler AG v. Bauman
571 U.S. 117 (2014) Cited 6,112 times 240 Legal Analyses
Holding that foreign corporations may not be subject to general jurisdiction "whenever they have an in-state subsidiary or affiliate"
Goodyear Dunlop Tires Oper. v. Brown
564 U.S. 915 (2011) Cited 5,633 times 88 Legal Analyses
Holding "the sales of petitioners' tires sporadically made in North Carolina through intermediaries" insufficient to support general jurisdiction
Burger King Corp. v. Rudzewicz
471 U.S. 462 (1985) Cited 17,402 times 47 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.
Helicopteros Nacionales de Colom. v. Hall
466 U.S. 408 (1984) Cited 9,493 times 26 Legal Analyses
Holding that “purchases, even if occurring at regular intervals” were insufficient to establish general personal jurisdiction over a nonresident corporation
World-Wide Volkswagen Corp. v. Woodson
444 U.S. 286 (1980) Cited 11,087 times 33 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
Calder v. Jones
465 U.S. 783 (1984) Cited 4,800 times 23 Legal Analyses
Holding a California court had personal jurisdiction over individual defendants when the defendants had not visited the state in connection with an allegedly defamatory article and "[we]re not responsible for the circulation of the article in California"
J. McIntyre Machinery, Ltd. v. Nicastro
564 U.S. 873 (2011) Cited 1,403 times 36 Legal Analyses
Holding that a metal-shearing machine manufacturer based in England that engaged an independent distributor to sell its machines across the U.S. was not subject to personal jurisdiction in New Jersey where the plaintiff was injured while using one of the company's machines
Hanson v. Denckla
357 U.S. 235 (1958) Cited 8,017 times 12 Legal Analyses
Holding that personal jurisdiction over defendant trustee was inappropriate when defendant's only contacts with the forum resulted from plaintiff-settlor's unilateral activity of moving to Florida
Rule 12 - Defenses and Objections: When and How Presented; Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings; Consolidating Motions; Waiving Defenses; Pretrial Hearing
Fed. R. Civ. P. 12 Cited 363,942 times 963 Legal Analyses
Granting the court discretion to exclude matters outside the pleadings presented to the court in defense of a motion to dismiss
Section 42-110b - Unfair trade practices prohibited. Legislative intent
Conn. Gen. Stat. § 42-110b Cited 782 times 10 Legal Analyses
Prohibiting "unfair or deceptive acts or practices in the conduct of any trade or commerce"
Section 52-59b - Jurisdiction of courts over nonresident individuals, foreign partnerships and foreign voluntary associations. Service of process
Conn. Gen. Stat. § 52-59b Cited 240 times 2 Legal Analyses
Listing criteria to include among others a non-resident defendant who “[t]ransacts any business within the state”
Section 33-929 - Service of process on foreign corporation
Conn. Gen. Stat. § 33-929 Cited 173 times 3 Legal Analyses
Relating to foreign corporations
Section 35-51 - Definitions
Conn. Gen. Stat. § 35-51 Cited 60 times 2 Legal Analyses
Defining trade secrets as information not "readily ascertainable by proper means"

Bull Bag, Llc v. Remorques Savage, Inc.

35 Cited authorities

Holding that courts are not required "to credit a complaint's conclusory statements without reference to its factual context"

Holding that allegations of conduct that are merely consistent with wrongdoing do not state a claim unless "placed in a context that raises a suggestion of" such wrongdoing

Holding that foreign corporations may not be subject to general jurisdiction "whenever they have an in-state subsidiary or affiliate"

Holding "the sales of petitioners' tires sporadically made in North Carolina through intermediaries" insufficient to support general jurisdiction

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.

Holding that “purchases, even if occurring at regular intervals” were insufficient to establish general personal jurisdiction over a nonresident corporation

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

Holding a California court had personal jurisdiction over individual defendants when the defendants had not visited the state in connection with an allegedly defamatory article and "[we]re not responsible for the circulation of the article in California"

Holding that a metal-shearing machine manufacturer based in England that engaged an independent distributor to sell its machines across the U.S. was not subject to personal jurisdiction in New Jersey where the plaintiff was injured while using one of the company's machines

Holding that personal jurisdiction over defendant trustee was inappropriate when defendant's only contacts with the forum resulted from plaintiff-settlor's unilateral activity of moving to Florida

Granting the court discretion to exclude matters outside the pleadings presented to the court in defense of a motion to dismiss

Prohibiting "unfair or deceptive acts or practices in the conduct of any trade or commerce"

Listing criteria to include among others a non-resident defendant who “[t]ransacts any business within the state”

Relating to foreign corporations

Defining trade secrets as information not "readily ascertainable by proper means"