36 Cited authorities

Burger King Corp. v. Rudzewicz
471 U.S. 462 (1985) Cited 16,817 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 9,267 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 10,825 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
Erie R. Co. v. Tompkins
304 U.S. 64 (1938) Cited 20,384 times 18 Legal Analyses
Holding that state law governs substantive issues and federal law governs procedural issues
Purdue Research v. Sanofi-Synthelabo, S.A
338 F.3d 773 (7th Cir. 2003) Cited 1,156 times
Holding that stream-of-commerce theory "is relevant only to the exercise of specific jurisdiction; it provides no basis for exercising general jurisdiction over a nonresident defendant"
Carlson v. CSX Transportation, Inc.
758 F.3d 819 (7th Cir. 2014) Cited 616 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding "the district court once again seemed to require evidence at the pleading stage" and "relied exclusively on a summary judgment case" in dismissing the Title VII retaliation claim
Felland v. Clifton
682 F.3d 665 (7th Cir. 2012) Cited 466 times
Holding that the defendant's "communications were intentional misrepresentations under Wisconsin law, which suffices to establish 'intentional and allegedly tortious conduct'"
uBID, Inc. v. Godaddy Grp., Inc.
623 F.3d 421 (7th Cir. 2010) Cited 414 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that "GoDaddy purposefully availed itself of the Illinois market for its services through its deliberate and continuous exploitation of that market"
DeLuna v. Burciaga
223 Ill. 2d 49 (Ill. 2006) Cited 413 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that under section 13–215, a defendant's fraudulent concealment tolls the statute of repose for legal malpractice actions
Abrahamson v. Illinois Department of Professional Regulation
153 Ill. 2d 76 (Ill. 1992) Cited 570 times
Holding that a state agency's interpretation of a statute "deserved judicial deference"
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 345,715 times 922 Legal Analyses
Granting the court discretion to exclude matters outside the pleadings presented to the court in defense of a motion to dismiss
Section 735 ILCS 5/2-209 - Act submitting to jurisdiction - Process
735 ILCS 5/2-209 Cited 993 times 5 Legal Analyses
Permitting a court to exercise personal jurisdiction over an individual for "any cause of action arising from" the transfer of property in Illinois
Section 740 ILCS 14/15 - Retention; Collection; Disclosure; Destruction
740 ILCS 14/15 Cited 210 times 68 Legal Analyses
Requiring “private entit[ies]” to comply with BIPA provisions
Section 740 ILCS 14/10 - Definitions
740 ILCS 14/10 Cited 111 times 37 Legal Analyses
Defining “[p]rivate entity” as any individual, partnership, corporation, limited liability company, association, or other group, however organized”
Section 740 ILCS 14/5 - Legislative Findings; Intent
740 ILCS 14/5 Cited 93 times 22 Legal Analyses
Recognizing public's wariness of use of biometrics and need for regulation for public welfare, security and safety

Norberg v. Shutterfly, Inc. et al

36 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 state law governs substantive issues and federal law governs procedural issues

Holding that stream-of-commerce theory "is relevant only to the exercise of specific jurisdiction; it provides no basis for exercising general jurisdiction over a nonresident defendant"

Holding "the district court once again seemed to require evidence at the pleading stage" and "relied exclusively on a summary judgment case" in dismissing the Title VII retaliation claim

Holding that the defendant's "communications were intentional misrepresentations under Wisconsin law, which suffices to establish 'intentional and allegedly tortious conduct'"

Holding that "GoDaddy purposefully availed itself of the Illinois market for its services through its deliberate and continuous exploitation of that market"

Holding that under section 13–215, a defendant's fraudulent concealment tolls the statute of repose for legal malpractice actions

Holding that a state agency's interpretation of a statute "deserved judicial deference"

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

Permitting a court to exercise personal jurisdiction over an individual for "any cause of action arising from" the transfer of property in Illinois

Requiring “private entit[ies]” to comply with BIPA provisions

Defining “[p]rivate entity” as any individual, partnership, corporation, limited liability company, association, or other group, however organized”

Recognizing public's wariness of use of biometrics and need for regulation for public welfare, security and safety