40 Cited authorities

  1. Daimler AG v. Bauman

    571 U.S. 117 (2014)   Cited 3,752 times   191 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 14,440 times   37 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. Atl. Marine Constr. Co. v. U.S. Dist. Court for the W. Dist. of Tex.

    571 U.S. 49 (2013)   Cited 2,413 times   35 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the correct procedural mechanism for enforcement of an FSC specifying a foreign forum is through a motion to dismiss for FNC
  4. Helicopteros Nacionales de Colom. v. Hall

    466 U.S. 408 (1984)   Cited 8,260 times   23 Legal Analyses
    Holding that “purchases, even if occurring at regular intervals” were insufficient to establish general personal jurisdiction over a nonresident corporation
  5. Calder v. Jones

    465 U.S. 783 (1984)   Cited 3,918 times   17 Legal Analyses
    Holding personal jurisdiction in California proper in a libel suit by a California resident against a Florida reporter
  6. Piper Aircraft Co. v. Reyno

    454 U.S. 235 (1981)   Cited 4,109 times   10 Legal Analyses
    Holding when determining if a foreign forum is adequate, a district court is not obligated to "conduct[] complex exercises in comparative [international] law"
  7. Int'l Shoe Co. v. Washington

    326 U.S. 310 (1945)   Cited 19,913 times   68 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "[t]he activities which establish its `presence' subject it alike to taxation by the state and to suit to recover the tax"
  8. Schwarzenegger v. Fred Martin Motor Co.

    374 F.3d 797 (9th Cir. 2004)   Cited 1,999 times
    Holding that, in the tort context, "[t]he `express aiming' analysis depends, to a significant degree, on the specific type of tort or other wrongful conduct at issue"
  9. Warren v. Fox Family Worldwide, Inc.

    328 F.3d 1136 (9th Cir. 2003)   Cited 938 times
    Holding the court is "not required to accept as true conclusory allegations which are contradicted by documents referred to in the complaint."
  10. Dole Food Co. v. Watts

    303 F.3d 1104 (9th Cir. 2002)   Cited 854 times
    Holding that plaintiffs must make a prima facie case for jurisdiction to survive a motion to dismiss
  11. 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 267,561 times   779 Legal Analyses
    Granting the court discretion to exclude matters outside the pleadings presented to the court in defense of a motion to dismiss
  12. Rule 8 - General Rules of Pleading

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 8   Cited 122,224 times   187 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "[e]very defense to a claim for relief in any pleading must be asserted in the responsive pleading. . . ."
  13. Section 1404 - Change of venue

    28 U.S.C. § 1404   Cited 24,163 times   143 Legal Analyses
    Granting Class Plaintiffs' motion to transfer action in order to "facilitate a unified settlement approval process together with the class action cases in" In re Amex ASR
  14. Section 1391 - Venue generally

    28 U.S.C. § 1391   Cited 22,250 times   187 Legal Analyses
    Finding that venue lies where a "substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claim" occurred
  15. Section 1746 - Unsworn declarations under penalty of perjury

    28 U.S.C. § 1746   Cited 8,160 times   13 Legal Analyses
    Explaining that any rule that requires an affidavit, such as Rule 56(e), can be satisfied by an "unsworn declaration . . . or statement, in writing . . . as true under penalty of perjury"
  16. Section 410.10 - Generally

    Cal. Civ. Proc. Code § 410.10   Cited 1,090 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Allowing for jurisdiction over non-residents coextensive with due process requirements
  17. Section 1646 - Law and usage of place where performed

    Cal. Civ. Code § 1646   Cited 158 times   1 Legal Analyses

    A contract is to be interpreted according to the law and usage of the place where it is to be performed; or, if it does not indicate a place of performance, according to the law and usage of the place where it is made. Ca. Civ. Code § 1646 Enacted 1872.

  18. Section 1301 - Territorial applicability; parties' power to choose applicable law

    Cal. Com. Code § 1301   Cited 3 times

    (a) Except as otherwise provided in this section, when a transaction bears a reasonable relation to this state and also to another state or nation, the parties may agree that the law either of this state or of the other state or nation shall govern their rights and duties. (b) In the absence of an agreement effective under subdivision (a), and except as provided in subdivision (c), this code applies to transactions bearing an appropriate relation to this state. (c) If one of the following provisions