Burger King Corp. v. Rudzewicz
471 U.S. 462 (1985) Cited 17,086 times 46 Legal AnalysesHolding 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 9,375 times 26 Legal AnalysesHolding 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 10,957 times 32 Legal AnalysesHolding 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 4,702 times 23 Legal AnalysesHolding 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"
Int'l Shoe Co. v. Washington
326 U.S. 310 (1945) Cited 22,892 times 110 Legal AnalysesHolding 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) )
Zippo Mfg. Co. v. Zippo Dot Com, Inc.
952 F. Supp. 1119 (W.D. Pa. 1997) Cited 1,317 times 11 Legal AnalysesHolding that a significant amount of the alleged infringement and dilution, as well as the resulting injury, occurred in Pennsylvania
Oldfield v. Pueblo De Bahia Lora, S.A.
558 F.3d 1210 (11th Cir. 2009) Cited 373 timesHolding that a foreign defendant's website advertising its resort was the but-for cause of plaintiff's injury at the resort, but that such an injury was not a foreseeable consequence of that contact
Licciardello v. Lovelady
544 F.3d 1280 (11th Cir. 2008) Cited 363 timesHolding that the plaintiff’s trademark infringement allegations "satisf[ied] the Calder effects test for personal jurisdiction—the commission of an intentional tort, expressly aimed at a specific individual in the forum whose effects were suffered in the forum"
Sculptchair, Inc. v. Century Arts, Ltd.
94 F.3d 623 (11th Cir. 1996) Cited 515 times 2 Legal AnalysesHolding that making phone calls from Canada to Florida did not qualify as carrying on a business venture in Florida
Jenkins Brick Co. v. Bremer
321 F.3d 1366 (11th Cir. 2003) Cited 244 timesHolding that the venue statute "contemplates some cases in which venue will be proper in two or more districts."
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 354,229 times 943 Legal AnalysesGranting the court discretion to exclude matters outside the pleadings presented to the court in defense of a motion to dismiss
Rule 4 - Summons
Fed. R. Civ. P. 4 Cited 71,368 times 127 Legal AnalysesHolding 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
Section 1391 - Venue generally
28 U.S.C. § 1391 Cited 28,500 times 199 Legal AnalysesFinding that venue lies where a "substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claim" occurred
Section 48.193 - Acts subjecting person to jurisdiction of courts of state
Fla. Stat. § 48.193 Cited 1,639 times 15 Legal AnalysesReferencing Fla. Stat. § 685.102