43 Cited authorities

Burger King Corp. v. Rudzewicz
471 U.S. 462 (1985) Cited 17,086 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.
Helicopteros Nacionales de Colom. v. Hall
466 U.S. 408 (1984) Cited 9,375 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 10,957 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
Asahi Metal Indus. Co. Ltd. v. Superior Court
480 U.S. 102 (1987) Cited 4,924 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
Int'l Shoe Co. v. Washington
326 U.S. 310 (1945) Cited 22,892 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) )
Hoblock v. Albany County Bd. of Elections
422 F.3d 77 (2d Cir. 2005) Cited 1,246 times
Holding that "[w]here a state-court judgment causes the challenged third-party action, any challenge to that third-party action is necessarily the kind of challenge to the state judgment that" the Rooker-Feldman doctrine bars
Temple v. Synthes Corp.
498 U.S. 5 (1990) Cited 541 times
Holding it was "error to label [alleged] joint tortfeasors as indispensable parties under Rule 19(b) and to dismiss the lawsuit with prejudice for failure to join those parties"
Dudnikov v. Chalk
514 F.3d 1063 (10th Cir. 2008) Cited 978 times 4 Legal Analyses
Holding that a Colorado court had personal jurisdiction over a defendant despite "the lack of defendants’ physical presence in Colorado" because they acted "with the ultimate purpose of cancelling plaintiffs’ auction in Colorado"
Bancroft Masters, Inc., v. Augusta National
223 F.3d 1082 (9th Cir. 2000) Cited 1,233 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that California had personal jurisdiction over declaratory judgment defendant because of defendant's challenge to plaintiff's registration for its domain name, which challenge was filed with an agency located in Virginia but affected the plaintiff's ability to use the domain name in California
Metropolitan Life Ins. v. Robertson-Ceco Corp.
84 F.3d 560 (2d Cir. 1996) Cited 1,407 times
Holding that dismissal was appropriate where no witnesses or other evidence were located in Vermont, neither party was a resident, and "Florida, the locus of the alleged tort . . . ha far more significant interest[] in resolving the dispute"
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 Analyses
Granting the court discretion to exclude matters outside the pleadings presented to the court in defense of a motion to dismiss
Rule 26 - Duty to Disclose; General Provisions Governing Discovery
Fed. R. Civ. P. 26 Cited 97,825 times 674 Legal Analyses
Adopting Fed.R.Civ.P. 37
Rule 4 - Summons
Fed. R. Civ. P. 4 Cited 71,368 times 127 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
Rule 19 - Required Joinder of Parties
Fed. R. Civ. P. 19 Cited 9,672 times 55 Legal Analyses
Holding a person must be joined if disposing the action in the person's absence may leave an existing party subject to a "substantial" risk of incurring inconsistent obligations
Section 302 - Personal jurisdiction by acts of non-domiciliaries
N.Y. C.P.L.R. § 302 Cited 4,286 times 5 Legal Analyses
Holding that service may be made "to a person of suitable age and discretion at the actual place of business, dwelling place or usual place of abode of the person to be served and by ... mailing the summons to the person to be served at his or her last known residence"
Section 304 - Duration of copyright: Subsisting copyrights
17 U.S.C. § 304 Cited 187 times 12 Legal Analyses
Extending the copyright term of works still under copyright in 1998 to 95 years

Marvel Worldwide, Inc. et al v. Kirby et al

43 Cited authorities

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 "[w]here a state-court judgment causes the challenged third-party action, any challenge to that third-party action is necessarily the kind of challenge to the state judgment that" the Rooker-Feldman doctrine bars

Holding it was "error to label [alleged] joint tortfeasors as indispensable parties under Rule 19(b) and to dismiss the lawsuit with prejudice for failure to join those parties"

Holding that a Colorado court had personal jurisdiction over a defendant despite "the lack of defendants’ physical presence in Colorado" because they acted "with the ultimate purpose of cancelling plaintiffs’ auction in Colorado"

Holding that dismissal was appropriate where no witnesses or other evidence were located in Vermont, neither party was a resident, and "Florida, the locus of the alleged tort . . . ha far more significant interest[] in resolving the dispute"

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

Adopting Fed.R.Civ.P. 37

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

Holding a person must be joined if disposing the action in the person's absence may leave an existing party subject to a "substantial" risk of incurring inconsistent obligations

Holding that service may be made "to a person of suitable age and discretion at the actual place of business, dwelling place or usual place of abode of the person to be served and by ... mailing the summons to the person to be served at his or her last known residence"

Extending the copyright term of works still under copyright in 1998 to 95 years