36 Cited authorities

Asahi Metal Indus. Co. Ltd. v. Superior Court
480 U.S. 102 (1987) Cited 4,906 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
Calder v. Jones
465 U.S. 783 (1984) Cited 4,676 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"
Holmes v. Securities Investor Protection Corp.
503 U.S. 258 (1992) Cited 1,678 times 8 Legal Analyses
Holding that the Securities Investor Protection Corporation (SIPC) could not recover under RICO for stock-manipulation scheme that bankrupted broker-dealers, triggering a statutory requirement that SIPC meet the broker-dealers' obligations to their customers
Hemi Group, LLC v. City of New York
559 U.S. 1 (2010) Cited 771 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding that the defendant retailer's failure to make state-law-required disclosures that would make it easier for the City to recover delinquent taxes did not proximately cause the City's injury, which more directly came from the delinquent taxpayers themselves
Anza v. Ideal Steel Supply Corp.
547 U.S. 451 (2006) Cited 856 times 5 Legal Analyses
Holding that a business could not recover against its competitor for a scheme to defraud the New York State tax authority that allowed the defendant to undercut the plaintiff's prices
Samantar v. Yousuf et al.
560 U.S. 305 (2010) Cited 381 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding that the common law, rather than the FSIA, governs the immunity of foreign officials
Canyon v. Syngenta
519 F.3d 969 (9th Cir. 2008) Cited 247 times 3 Legal Analyses
Holding that county could not sue employer who hired undocumented immigrants for alleged increase in law enforcement expenditures because "the asserted causal chain ... is quite attenuated," "would be difficult to ascertain because there are numerous alternative causes that might be the actual source or sources of the [plaintiff's] alleged harm," and the "injury would be speculative in the extreme"
King v. Crossland Savings Bank
111 F.3d 251 (2d Cir. 1997) Cited 222 times
Holding that defendant must have "intended or instigated the confinement of the plaintiff"
In re Terrorist
538 F.3d 71 (2d Cir. 2008) Cited 123 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that even if Saudi princes could and did foresee that Muslim charities would use their donations to finance the September 11 attacks, providing indirect funding to an organization that was openly hostile to the United States did not constitute the type of intentional conduct necessary to constitute purposeful direction of activities at the forum
In re Terrorist Attacks on September 11
349 F. Supp. 2d 765 (S.D.N.Y. 2005) Cited 118 times 1 Legal Analyses
Finding that the parties should have the opportunity to take discovery of the jurisdictionally relevant facts where the status of an organization was not determinable and where discovery could “uncover sufficient facts to sustain jurisdiction”
Rule 4 - Summons
Fed. R. Civ. P. 4 Cited 70,485 times 126 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 1292 - Interlocutory decisions
28 U.S.C. § 1292 Cited 22,452 times 197 Legal Analyses
Granting appellate jurisdiction over certain types of interlocutory orders
Section 1964 - Civil remedies
18 U.S.C. § 1964 Cited 6,129 times 42 Legal Analyses
Granting civil remedies for RICO violation
Section 15 - Suits by persons injured
15 U.S.C. § 15 Cited 5,712 times 35 Legal Analyses
Granting private right of action to anyone who has been injured "by reason of anything forbidden in the antitrust laws ..."
Section 2333 - Civil remedies
18 U.S.C. § 2333 Cited 473 times 22 Legal Analyses
Granting any ATA claimant the right to sue "in any appropriate district court of the United States"

In Re: Terrorist Attacks on September 11, 2001

36 Cited authorities

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

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"

Holding that the Securities Investor Protection Corporation (SIPC) could not recover under RICO for stock-manipulation scheme that bankrupted broker-dealers, triggering a statutory requirement that SIPC meet the broker-dealers' obligations to their customers

Holding that the defendant retailer's failure to make state-law-required disclosures that would make it easier for the City to recover delinquent taxes did not proximately cause the City's injury, which more directly came from the delinquent taxpayers themselves

Holding that a business could not recover against its competitor for a scheme to defraud the New York State tax authority that allowed the defendant to undercut the plaintiff's prices

Holding that the common law, rather than the FSIA, governs the immunity of foreign officials

Holding that defendant must have "intended or instigated the confinement of the plaintiff"

Finding that the parties should have the opportunity to take discovery of the jurisdictionally relevant facts where the status of an organization was not determinable and where discovery could “uncover sufficient facts to sustain jurisdiction”

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 appellate jurisdiction over certain types of interlocutory orders

Granting civil remedies for RICO violation

Granting private right of action to anyone who has been injured "by reason of anything forbidden in the antitrust laws ..."

Granting any ATA claimant the right to sue "in any appropriate district court of the United States"