ASARCO LLC v. Env't Prot. Agency, 568 U.S. 1143 (2013).

ASARCO LLC v. Env't Prot. Agency, 568 U.S. 1143 (2013). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite

green Positive treatment 5.8 score

3 citation events across 3 distinct courts.

Strongest positive: O'Neil v. Martin (orctapp, 2013-10-09)

Top citers, strongest first. 2 distinct citers. How cited ↗

discussed Cited "see" O'Neil v. Martin

Or. Ct. App. · 2013 · signal: see · confidence high

Accordingly, the trial court had jurisdiction over defendants Sirmons and Estes if the exercise of jurisdiction would comport with the Fourteenth Amendment’s Due Process Clause. 3 Under the Due Process Clause, “a state court may exercise personal jurisdiction over a nonresident defendant only so long as there exist ‘minimum contacts’ between the defendant and the forum State.” World-Wide Volkswagen Corp. v. Woodsen, 444 US 286, 291 , 100 S Ct 559 , 62 L Ed 2d 490 (1980) (quoting International Shoe Co. v. Washington, 326 US 310, 316 , 66 S Ct 154, 158 , 90 L Ed 95 (1945)); see Willems…

discussed Cited "see" Lisa Williamson v. Mark Curran, Jr.

7th Cir. · 2013 · signal: see · confidence high

See Kim v. Ritter, 493 Fed.Appx. 787, 789-90 (7th Cir.2012) (non-precedential decision) (citing Wagner v. Washington Cnty., 493 F.3d 833, 836 (7th Cir.2007) (per curiam), and Askew v. City of Chicago, supra, 440 F.3d at 895 )), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 133 S.Ct. 984 , 184 L.Ed.2d 762 (2013).