24 Cited authorities

Daimler AG v. Bauman
571 U.S. 117 (2014) Cited 6,168 times 240 Legal Analyses
Holding that foreign corporations may not be subject to general jurisdiction "whenever they have an in-state subsidiary or affiliate"
Walden v. Fiore
571 U.S. 277 (2014) Cited 4,700 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, 105 S.Ct. 2174, 85 L.Ed.2d 528 (1985))
Burger King Corp. v. Rudzewicz
471 U.S. 462 (1985) Cited 17,459 times 47 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.
Helicopteros Nacionales de Colom. v. Hall
466 U.S. 408 (1984) Cited 9,517 times 26 Legal Analyses
Holding 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 11,111 times 33 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
Asahi Metal Indus. Co. Ltd. v. Superior Court
480 U.S. 102 (1987) Cited 4,992 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
Keeton v. Hustler Magazine, Inc.
465 U.S. 770 (1984) Cited 3,157 times 8 Legal Analyses
Holding that jurisdiction was proper in New Hampshire for publication-based defamation torts, even though the defendant magazine publisher sold most of its magazines elsewhere and that, as a result, "the bulk of the harm done to [the plaintiff] occurred outside New Hampshire"
Int'l Shoe Co. v. Washington
326 U.S. 310 (1945) Cited 23,293 times 113 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) )
Shaffer v. Heitner
433 U.S. 186 (1977) Cited 3,233 times 8 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
Hanson v. Denckla
357 U.S. 235 (1958) Cited 8,029 times 12 Legal Analyses
Holding that personal jurisdiction over defendant trustee was inappropriate when defendant's only contacts with the forum resulted from plaintiff-settlor's unilateral activity of moving to Florida
Section 410.10 - Generally
Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 410.10 Cited 1,395 times 1 Legal Analyses
Allowing for jurisdiction over non-residents coextensive with due process requirements

Motionredacted

24 Cited authorities

Holding that foreign corporations may not be subject to general jurisdiction "whenever they have an in-state subsidiary or affiliate"

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, 105 S.Ct. 2174, 85 L.Ed.2d 528 (1985))

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.

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

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

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 that jurisdiction was proper in New Hampshire for publication-based defamation torts, even though the defendant magazine publisher sold most of its magazines elsewhere and that, as a result, "the bulk of the harm done to [the plaintiff] occurred outside New Hampshire"

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

Holding that personal jurisdiction over defendant trustee was inappropriate when defendant's only contacts with the forum resulted from plaintiff-settlor's unilateral activity of moving to Florida

Allowing for jurisdiction over non-residents coextensive with due process requirements