§Why CasetextPricing

Haverhill Retirement System v. Barclays Bank PLC et al

REPLY MEMORANDUM OF LAW in Support re: 501 MOTION to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction . . Document

61 Cited authorities

  1. Daimler AG v. Bauman

    571 U.S. 117 (2014)   Cited 5,886 times   237 Legal Analyses
    Holding that foreign corporations may not be subject to general jurisdiction "whenever they have an in-state subsidiary or affiliate"

  2. Walden v. Fiore

    571 U.S. 277 (2014)   Cited 4,487 times   49 Legal Analyses
    Holding that, for specific jurisdiction, "the relationship must arise out of contacts that the 'defendant [it]self' creates with the forum State" (quoting Burger King Corp. v. Rudzewicz, 471 U.S. 462, 475 (1985))

  3. Burger King Corp. v. Rudzewicz

    471 U.S. 462 (1985)   Cited 17,124 times   46 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.

  4. Zadvydas v. Davis

    533 U.S. 678 (2001)   Cited 4,303 times   17 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the Government's detention authority under Section 1231 is authorized for "a period reasonably necessary to secure removal"

  5. World-Wide Volkswagen Corp. v. Woodson

    444 U.S. 286 (1980)   Cited 10,970 times   32 Legal Analyses
    Holding 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

  6. Asahi Metal Indus. Co. Ltd. v. Superior Court

    480 U.S. 102 (1987)   Cited 4,935 times   40 Legal Analyses
    Holding that, in suit by Taiwanese manufacturer for indemnification against Japanese manufacturer, the assertion by California court of personal jurisdiction over Japanese manufacturer was unreasonable

  7. Calder v. Jones

    465 U.S. 783 (1984)   Cited 4,712 times   23 Legal Analyses
    Holding 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"

  8. J. McIntyre Machinery, Ltd. v. Nicastro

    564 U.S. 873 (2011)   Cited 1,372 times   36 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

  9. Int'l Shoe Co. v. Washington

    326 U.S. 310 (1945)   Cited 22,926 times   110 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) )

  10. Koontz v. St. Johns River Water Mgmt. Dist.

    570 U.S. 595 (2013)   Cited 319 times   24 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the court could not condition the grant of land use permits upon the applicant's funding of offsite mitigation projects on public land

  11. Section 200 - When foreign banking corporation may transact business in this state

    N.Y. Banking Law § 200   Cited 84 times   2 Legal Analyses

    No foreign banking corporation, other than a bank organized under the laws of the United States, shall transact in this state the business of buying, selling, paying or collecting bills of exchange, or of issuing letters of credit or of receiving money for transmission or transmitting the same by draft, check, cable or otherwise, or of making loans, or of receiving deposits, or of exercising the fiduciary powers specified in section two hundred one-b of this chapter, or transacting any part of such

  12. Section 200-B - Actions maintained against foreign banking corporation; residents; foreign corporations, foreign banking corporations as non-residents

    N.Y. Banking Law § 200-B   Cited 18 times

    1. An action or special proceeding against a foreign banking corporation may be maintained by a resident of this state for any cause of action. For purposes of this subdivision one, the term "resident of this state" shall include any corporation formed under any law of this state. 2. Except as otherwise provided in this chapter, an action or special proceeding against a foreign banking corporation may be maintained by another foreign corporation or foreign banking corporation or by a non-resident

  13. Section 221-C - Application for license; fees

    N.Y. Banking Law § 221-C

    The application for such license shall be in writing under oath and shall contain the information required by and be in the form prescribed by the superintendent. As part of the application, the foreign banking corporation shall appoint the superintendent or his or her successor as agent for service of process in connection with any action or proceeding against the foreign banking corporation relating to any cause of action which may arise out of a transaction with its representative office, with