18 Cited authorities

Helicopteros Nacionales de Colom. v. Hall
466 U.S. 408 (1984) Cited 9,405 times 26 Legal Analyses
Holding that “purchases, even if occurring at regular intervals” were insufficient to establish general personal jurisdiction over a nonresident corporation
Omni Capital Int'l v. Rudolf Wolff Co.
484 U.S. 97 (1987) Cited 1,945 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that due process concerns related to personal jurisdiction are alleviated where the defendant has consented to service
Sawtelle v. Farrell
70 F.3d 1381 (1st Cir. 1995) Cited 582 times
Holding that lawyers' acceptance of an attorney-client relationship with New Hampshire clients was not purposeful availment vis-à-vis New Hampshire
Lakin v. Prudential Secs., Inc.
348 F.3d 704 (8th Cir. 2003) Cited 296 times
Holding that the “Zippo model is an appropriate approach in cases of specific jurisdiction”
Noonan v. the Winston Company
135 F.3d 85 (1st Cir. 1998) Cited 189 times
Holding that Calder test was not satisfied because defendants did not target forum even though plaintiffs felt tortious effect there
U.S. v. Swiss Am. Bank
191 F.3d 30 (1st Cir. 1999) Cited 161 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that consideration of summary judgment motion should await determination of jurisdiction
Northern Laminate Sales, Inc. v. Davis
403 F.3d 14 (1st Cir. 2005) Cited 133 times
Finding the requirement of purposeful availment was met where the defendant knew his statements would likely induce reliance and cause injury in the forum state
Glater v. Eli Lilly & Co.
744 F.2d 213 (1st Cir. 1984) Cited 101 times
Holding that advertising in professional journals and employing sales representatives did not justify general jurisdiction
Dagesse v. Plant Hotel, N.V.
113 F. Supp. 2d 211 (D.N.H. 2000) Cited 41 times
Finding that hotel's website did not establish specific jurisdiction where plaintiffs did not allege that they visited the website before their trip
Coastal Video Communications v. Staywell Corp.
59 F. Supp. 2d 562 (E.D. Va. 1999) Cited 38 times
Holding that advertising, either via the Internet or through mail-order catalogs, did not amount to "proof that [the defendant] transacted business relevant to the cause of action"
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 357,280 times 950 Legal Analyses
Granting 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 72,180 times 128 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
Section 223A:3 - Transactions or conduct for personal jurisdiction
Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 223A § 3 Cited 464 times 2 Legal Analyses
Granting jurisdiction over claims "arising from" certain enumerated grounds occurring within Massachusetts

Harrington et al v. Delta Airlines, Inc. et al

18 Cited authorities

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

Holding that due process concerns related to personal jurisdiction are alleviated where the defendant has consented to service

Holding that lawyers' acceptance of an attorney-client relationship with New Hampshire clients was not purposeful availment vis-à-vis New Hampshire

Holding that the “Zippo model is an appropriate approach in cases of specific jurisdiction”

Holding that Calder test was not satisfied because defendants did not target forum even though plaintiffs felt tortious effect there

Holding that consideration of summary judgment motion should await determination of jurisdiction

Finding the requirement of purposeful availment was met where the defendant knew his statements would likely induce reliance and cause injury in the forum state

Holding that advertising in professional journals and employing sales representatives did not justify general jurisdiction

Finding that hotel's website did not establish specific jurisdiction where plaintiffs did not allege that they visited the website before their trip

Holding that advertising, either via the Internet or through mail-order catalogs, did not amount to "proof that [the defendant] transacted business relevant to the cause of action"

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

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

Granting jurisdiction over claims "arising from" certain enumerated grounds occurring within Massachusetts