37 Cited authorities

Daimler AG v. Bauman
571 U.S. 117 (2014) Cited 5,616 times 236 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 5,201 times 86 Legal Analyses
Holding "the sales of petitioners' tires sporadically made in North Carolina through intermediaries" insufficient to support general jurisdiction
Walden v. Fiore
571 U.S. 277 (2014) Cited 4,297 times 49 Legal Analyses
Holding that “the mere fact that [defendant's] conduct affected plaintiffs with connections to the forum State does not suffice to authorize jurisdiction.”
Helicopteros Nacionales de Colom. v. Hall
466 U.S. 408 (1984) Cited 9,269 times 26 Legal Analyses
Holding that “purchases, even if occurring at regular intervals” were insufficient to establish general personal jurisdiction over a nonresident corporation
Int'l Shoe Co. v. Washington
326 U.S. 310 (1945) Cited 22,584 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) )
Shaffer v. Heitner
433 U.S. 186 (1977) Cited 3,170 times 7 Legal Analyses
Holding that, once a judgment is validly rendered against a debtor, the judgment creditor may sue to satisfy the debt with property in a state that lacks personal jurisdiction over the judgment debtor
Rush v. Savchuk
444 U.S. 320 (1980) Cited 806 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding that party was not subject to state's jurisdiction in a personal injury action simply because his insurer was based there, and stating that the requirement of minimum contacts "must be met as to each defendant . . ."
O'Connor v. Sandy Lane
496 F.3d 312 (3d Cir. 2007) Cited 1,133 times 7 Legal Analyses
Holding a vacation company purposefully contacted Pennsylvania by mailing brochures and calling Pennsylvania residents
Perkins v. Benguet Mining Co.
342 U.S. 437 (1952) Cited 1,818 times 4 Legal Analyses
Holding Ohio courts could exercise general jurisdiction over a foreign corporation due to the extent and nature of the temporary operations in the state, finding such business activity was continuous and systematic
Mellon Bank (East) PSFS, National Ass'n v. Farino
960 F.2d 1217 (3d Cir. 1992) Cited 1,123 times
Holding that plaintiff's right to conduct jurisdictional discovery should be sustained when factual allegations suggest the possible existence of requisite contacts between the defendant and the forum state with "reasonable particularity"
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 345,805 times 922 Legal Analyses
Granting the court discretion to exclude matters outside the pleadings presented to the court in defense of a motion to dismiss

Colton O Reilly et al v. Mckesson Corporation, et al

37 Cited authorities

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 “the mere fact that [defendant's] conduct affected plaintiffs with connections to the forum State does not suffice to authorize jurisdiction.”

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

Holding that, once a judgment is validly rendered against a debtor, the judgment creditor may sue to satisfy the debt with property in a state that lacks personal jurisdiction over the judgment debtor

Holding that party was not subject to state's jurisdiction in a personal injury action simply because his insurer was based there, and stating that the requirement of minimum contacts "must be met as to each defendant . . ."

Holding a vacation company purposefully contacted Pennsylvania by mailing brochures and calling Pennsylvania residents

Holding Ohio courts could exercise general jurisdiction over a foreign corporation due to the extent and nature of the temporary operations in the state, finding such business activity was continuous and systematic

Holding that plaintiff's right to conduct jurisdictional discovery should be sustained when factual allegations suggest the possible existence of requisite contacts between the defendant and the forum state with "reasonable particularity"

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