91 Cited authorities

  1. Daimler AG v. Bauman

    571 U.S. 117 (2014)   Cited 4,033 times   193 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 14,889 times   38 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. Goodyear Dunlop Tires Oper. v. Brown

    564 U.S. 915 (2011)   Cited 3,547 times   60 Legal Analyses
    Holding "the sales of petitioners' tires sporadically made in North Carolina through intermediaries" insufficient to support general jurisdiction
  4. Walden v. Fiore

    571 U.S. 277 (2014)   Cited 3,019 times   45 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "however significant the plaintiff's contacts with the forum may be, those contacts cannot be decisive in determining whether the defendant's due process rights are violated"
  5. Helicopteros Nacionales de Colom. v. Hall

    466 U.S. 408 (1984)   Cited 8,472 times   23 Legal Analyses
    Holding that “purchases, even if occurring at regular intervals” were insufficient to establish general personal jurisdiction over a nonresident corporation
  6. J. McIntyre Machinery, Ltd. v. Nicastro

    564 U.S. 873 (2011)   Cited 1,053 times   32 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
  7. Ins. Corp. of Ir. v. Compagnie Des Bauxites De Guinee

    456 U.S. 694 (1982)   Cited 3,384 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that unlike subject matter jurisdiction, a defect in personal jurisdiction can be waived
  8. Keeton v. Hustler Magazine, Inc.

    465 U.S. 770 (1984)   Cited 2,635 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Holding that due process demands that courts assess "[e]ach defendant's contacts ... individually"
  9. Shaffer v. Heitner

    433 U.S. 186 (1977)   Cited 2,985 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
  10. Burnham v. Superior Court of Cal., Marin County

    495 U.S. 604 (1990)   Cited 615 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that personal service in a state is sufficient for establishing personal jurisdiction
  11. Rule 4 - Summons

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 4   Cited 51,052 times   103 Legal Analyses
    Holding that if defendant is not served within 90 days after the complaint is filed, the court—on a motion, or on its own following notice to the plaintiff—must dismiss the action without prejudice against that defendant or order that service be made by a certain time
  12. Rule 54 - Judgment; Costs

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 54   Cited 33,395 times   138 Legal Analyses
    Granting $7,100.30 of the $36,681.63 requested
  13. Section 2339B - Providing material support or resources to designated foreign terrorist organizations

    18 U.S.C. § 2339B   Cited 455 times   14 Legal Analyses
    Clarifying the scope of “personnel”
  14. Section 2333 - Civil remedies

    18 U.S.C. § 2333   Cited 327 times   7 Legal Analyses
    Granting any ATA claimant the right to sue "in any appropriate district court of the United States"
  15. Section 2331 - Definitions

    18 U.S.C. § 2331   Cited 287 times   14 Legal Analyses
    Defining "international terrorism" to include activities that would violate the criminal laws of the United States or any State and that, inter alia , "involve violence or endanger human life" and "appear to be intended" to intimidate or coerce a civilian population or government
  16. Section 2334 - Jurisdiction and venue

    18 U.S.C. § 2334   Cited 42 times
    Providing for nationwide service of process “where[ever] the defendant resides, is found, or has an agent”