green
Positive treatment
4.7 score
Treatment trajectory · 2006 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
2006
2016
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 6 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited "see"
Best v. Guthrie Med. Group, P.C.
State' " as required for general jurisdiction ( Robins , 157 AD3d at 607, quoting Daimler AG v Bauman , 571 US 117, 139 [2014]; see CPLR 301) or whether its activities in New York are " purposeful and [whether] there is a substantial relationship between the transaction and the claim asserted' " as required for long-arm jurisdiction ( Deutsche Bank Sec., Inc. v Montana Bd. of Invs. , 7 NY3d 65, 71 [2006], cert denied 549 US 1095 [2006]; see CPLR 302 [a] [1]).
discussed
Cited "see"
Glazer v. Socata, S.A.S.
CPLR 302 (a) (1) permits New York courts to exercise personal jurisdiction over any entity that "in person or through an agent . . . transacts any business within the state or contracts anywhere to supply goods or services in the state." Jurisdiction can attach on the basis of one [*2]transaction, even if the defendant never enters the state, " so long as the defendant's activities here were purposeful and there is a substantial relationship between the transaction and the claim asserted' " ( Fischbarg v Doucet , 9 NY3d 375, 380 [2007]; see Deutsche Bank Sec., Inc. v Montana Bd. of Invs. , 7 N…
discussed
Cited "see"
Oasis International Waters, Inc. v. United States
See In re EchoStar Commc’ns Corp., 448 F.3d 1294, 1299 (Fed.Cir.) (extending waiver of the privilege with respect to communications with in-house counsel to communications with outside counsel on the same subject matter), cert. denied, 549 U.S. 1096 , 127 S.Ct. 846 , 166 L.Ed.2d 665 (2006).
discussed
Cited "see"
Zottola v. AGI Group, Inc.
Under CPLR 302 (a) (1), the provision at issue here, “a court may exercise personal jurisdiction over any non-domiciliary, or his executor or administrator, who in person or through an agent . . . transacts any business within the state or contracts anywhere to supply goods or services in the state.” CPLR 302 (a) (1) “is a ‘single act statute’ and proof of one transaction in New York is sufficient to invoke jurisdiction, even though the defendant never enters New York, so long as the defendant’s activities here were purposeful and there is a substantial relationship between the tra…
examined
Cited "see, e.g."
Mirman v. Feiner
(3×)
It is also well established that a party need not be physically present in the state at the time of service in order for the court to obtain personal jurisdiction, “[s]o long as a party avails itself of the benefits of the forum, has sufficient minimum contacts with it, and should reasonably expect to defend its actions there.” Kreutter v. McFadden Oil Corp., 71 N.Y.2d 460, 466 , 527 N.Y.S.2d 195 , 522 N.E.2d 40 (1988); see also Deutsche Bank Sec., Inc. v. Montana Bd. of Invs., 7 N.Y.3d 65, 71 , 818 N.Y.S.2d 164 , 850 N.E.2d 1140 (2006) (“[T]he growth of national markets for commercial t…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Jicarilla Apache Nation v. United States
The attorney-client privilege “protects the confidentiality of communications between attorney and client made for the purpose of obtaining legal advice.” Genentech, Inc. v. United States Int’l Trade Comm’n, 122 F.3d 1409 , 1415 (Fed.Cir.1997); see also In re EchoStar Commc’ns Corp., 448 F.3d 1294, 1299 (Fed.Cir.2006), cert. denied, 549 U.S. 1096 , 127 S.Ct. 846 , 166 L.Ed.2d 665 (2006); Am.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
MONTANA BOARD OF INVESTMENTS, petitioner,
v.
DEUTSCH BANK SECURITIES, INC.
v.
DEUTSCH BANK SECURITIES, INC.
06-291.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Dec 11, 2006.
Cited by 7 opinions | Published
Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Appeals of New York denied.