15 Alabama opinions name it 2 courts 2001–2025 3 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Alabama courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Harry Palmer v. Eldon Braungreen2 sentences2016See Stubbs [v. Wyndham Nassau Resort & Crystal Palace Casino], 447 F.3d 1357, 1364 [ (11th Cir.2006) ]; Palmer v. Braun, 376 F.3d 1254, 1259 (11th Cir.2004) (explaining that defendant waives personal jurisdiction defense by not interposing it in responsive pleading or motion, to dismiss); Posner v. Essex Ins. 2014See Stubbs [v. Wyndham Nassau Resort & Crystal Palace Casino], 447 F.3d 1357, 1364 [(11th Cir.2006) ]; Palmer v. Braun, 376 F.3d 1254, 1259 (11th Cir.2004) (explaining that defendant waives personal jurisdiction defense by not interposing it in responsive pleading or motion to dismiss); Posner v. Essex Ins. | 2 | 2 |
Stubbs v. Wyndham Nassau Resort & Crystal Palace Casinogreen2 sentences2016See Stubbs [v. Wyndham Nassau Resort & Crystal Palace Casino], 447 F.3d 1357, 1364 [ (11th Cir.2006) ]; Palmer v. Braun, 376 F.3d 1254, 1259 (11th Cir.2004) (explaining that defendant waives personal jurisdiction defense by not interposing it in responsive pleading or motion, to dismiss); Posner v. Essex Ins. 2014See Stubbs [v. Wyndham Nassau Resort & Crystal Palace Casino], 447 F.3d 1357, 1364 [(11th Cir.2006) ]; Palmer v. Braun, 376 F.3d 1254, 1259 (11th Cir.2004) (explaining that defendant waives personal jurisdiction defense by not interposing it in responsive pleading or motion to dismiss); Posner v. Essex Ins. | 2 | 2 |
Hutchinson v. Chase & Gilbert, Inc.green2 sentences2008As Judge Learned Hand lamented when he attempted to apply the "presence" test for personal jurisdiction, "[i]t is quite impossible to establish any rule from the decided cases; we must step from tuft to tuft across the morass." Hutchinson v. Chase & Gilbert, Inc., 45 F.2d 139, 142 (2nd Cir. 1930); see, e.g., Echeverry v. Kellogg Switchboard & Supply Co., 175 F.2d 900, 902-03 (2d Cir. 1949) ("The published decisions on what constitutes `doing business' in a State by a foreign corporation are literally legion. 2008As Judge Learned Hand lamented when he attempted to apply the "presence” test for personal jurisdiction, "[i]t is quite impossible to establish any rule from the decided cases; we must step from tuft to tuft across the morass.” Hutchinson v. Chase & Gilbert, Inc., 45 F.2d 139, 142 (2d Cir. 1930); see, e.g., Echeveny v. Kellogg Switchboard & Supply Co., 175 F.2d 900, 902-03 (2d Cir. 1949) ("The published decisions on what constitutes ‘doing business' in a State by a foreign corporation are literally legion. | 2 | 2 |
Echeverry v. Kellogg Switchboard & Supply Co.green2 sentences2008As Judge Learned Hand lamented when he attempted to apply the "presence" test for personal jurisdiction, "[i]t is quite impossible to establish any rule from the decided cases; we must step from tuft to tuft across the morass." Hutchinson v. Chase & Gilbert, Inc., 45 F.2d 139, 142 (2nd Cir. 1930); see, e.g., Echeverry v. Kellogg Switchboard & Supply Co., 175 F.2d 900, 902-03 (2d Cir. 1949) ("The published decisions on what constitutes `doing business' in a State by a foreign corporation are literally legion. 2008As Judge Learned Hand lamented when he attempted to apply the "presence” test for personal jurisdiction, "[i]t is quite impossible to establish any rule from the decided cases; we must step from tuft to tuft across the morass.” Hutchinson v. Chase & Gilbert, Inc., 45 F.2d 139, 142 (2d Cir. 1930); see, e.g., Echeveny v. Kellogg Switchboard & Supply Co., 175 F.2d 900, 902-03 (2d Cir. 1949) ("The published decisions on what constitutes ‘doing business' in a State by a foreign corporation are literally legion. | 2 | 2 |
Chatham v. Chathamgreen1 sentence2016See Ex parte Chatham, 109 So.3d 662, 663 (Ala. Civ. | 1 | 1 |
Continental Bank v. Meyergreen2 sentences2014On this point, it does not suffice to comport with the letter of Rule 12(h); rather, litigants must adhere to its spirit by pursuing a personal jurisdiction defense in a reasonably prompt fashion ‘to expedite and simplify proceedings in the Federal Courts.’ Id.; see also Continental Bank, N.A. v. Meyer, 10 F.3d 1293, 1297 (7th Cir.1993) (similar). 2014On this point, it does not suffice to comport with the letter of Rule 12(h); rather, litigants must adhere to its spirit by pursuing a personal jurisdiction defense in a reasonably prompt fashion 'to expedite and simplify proceedings in the Federal Courts.' Id.; see also Continental Bank, N.A. v. Meyer, 10 F.3d 1293, 1297 (7th Cir. 1993) (similar). | 1 | 1 |
Mobile Anesthesiologists Chicago, LLC v. Anesthesia Associates of Houston Metroplex, P.A.green2 sentences2014In his dissenting opinion Justice Mur-dock supports his view that no waiver is here presented by citing Gerber v. Riordan, 649 F.3d 514 (6th Cir.2011), in which the court stated: “Only those submissions, appearances and filings that give ‘[Pjlaintiff a reasonable expectation that [Defendants] will defend the suit on the merits or must cause the court to go to some effort that would be wasted if personal jurisdiction is later found lacking,’ [Mobile Anesthesiologists Chicago, LLC v. Anesthesia Associates of Houston Metroplex, P.A., 623 F.3d 440, 443 (7th Cir.2010) ], result in waiver of a perso 2014Only those submissions, appearances and filings that give ‘[PJlain-tijf a reasonable expectation that [Defendants] will defend the suit on the merits or must cause the court to go to some effort that would be wasted if personal jurisdiction is later found lacking,’ id. at 443, result in waiver of a personal jurisdiction defense.” 649 F.3d at 519 (emphasis added). | 1 | 1 |
Gerber v. Riordangreen2 sentences2014In his dissenting opinion Justice Mur-dock supports his view that no waiver is here presented by citing Gerber v. Riordan, 649 F.3d 514 (6th Cir.2011), in which the court stated: “Only those submissions, appearances and filings that give ‘[Pjlaintiff a reasonable expectation that [Defendants] will defend the suit on the merits or must cause the court to go to some effort that would be wasted if personal jurisdiction is later found lacking,’ [Mobile Anesthesiologists Chicago, LLC v. Anesthesia Associates of Houston Metroplex, P.A., 623 F.3d 440, 443 (7th Cir.2010) ], result in waiver of a perso 2014Only those submissions, appearances and filings that give ‘[PJlain-tijf a reasonable expectation that [Defendants] will defend the suit on the merits or must cause the court to go to some effort that would be wasted if personal jurisdiction is later found lacking,’ id. at 443, result in waiver of a personal jurisdiction defense.” 649 F.3d at 519 (emphasis added). | 1 | 1 |
Linda Hamilton, Individually and as of the Estate of George Hamilton v. Atlas Turner, Inc.green1 sentence2014The longer the time interval, the more likely it is that courts will find a waiver. 29 1130184, 1130231 See Hamilton, 197 F.3d at 62 (determining that defendant forfeited personal jurisdiction defense by failing to raise it for four years after inclusion of defense in answer); Continental Bank, N.A. v. Meyer, 10 F.3d 1293, 1297 (7th Cir. 1993) (finding waiver where defendants did not actively contest personal jurisdiction for more than two and a half years after listing the defense in their answer); Hunger, [ 203 F.3d 835 ] (defendant waived personal jurisdiction defense by waiting more than t | 1 | 1 |
Carol Clune Paul L. Clune Kelly M. Clune v. Alimak Ab Alimak Elevator Company Industrivarden Service Ab,defendant-Appelleegreen2 sentences2008See also id. at 613 n. 4 (explaining how the distinction between what the defendant knew and should have known is immaterial to the personal jurisdiction analysis). 2008See also id. at 613 n. 4 (explaining how the distinction between what the defendant knew and should have known is immaterial to the personal jurisdiction analysis). | 1 | 1 |
Robinson v. Giarmarco & Bill, P.C.green1 sentence2003For purposes of a personal-jurisdiction analysis, when the allegations of the complaint are contradicted by the defendant's affidavits, courts "`construe all reasonable inferences in favor of the plaintiff.'" Robinson v. Giarmarco & Bill, P.C., 74 F.3d 253, 255 (11th Cir. 1996) (quoting Madara v. Hall, 916 F.2d 1510, 1514 (11th Cir.1990)). [8] The article alleged that the plaintiff, an actress, "drank so heavily as to prevent her from fulfilling her professional obligations." 465 U.S. at 789 n. 9, 104 S.Ct. 1482 . [9] Section 8-6-12(e)(1) provides, in pertinent part: "[E]very issuer which prop | 1 | 1 |
John Madara v. Daryl Hallgreen1 sentence2003For purposes of a personal-jurisdiction analysis, when the allegations of the complaint are contradicted by the defendant's affidavits, courts "`construe all reasonable inferences in favor of the plaintiff.'" Robinson v. Giarmarco & Bill, P.C., 74 F.3d 253, 255 (11th Cir. 1996) (quoting Madara v. Hall, 916 F.2d 1510, 1514 (11th Cir.1990)). [8] The article alleged that the plaintiff, an actress, "drank so heavily as to prevent her from fulfilling her professional obligations." 465 U.S. at 789 n. 9, 104 S.Ct. 1482 . [9] Section 8-6-12(e)(1) provides, in pertinent part: "[E]very issuer which prop | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Alabama. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Ford Motor Co. v. Montana Eighth Judicial Dist.
green
2 sentences2025In Sawyer, a product-liability action, this Court adopted and applied the personal- jurisdiction analysis expounded by the United States Supreme Court in Ford Motor Co. v. Montana Eighth Judicial District Court, 592 U.S. 351 (2021). 2025In Sawyer, a product-liability action, this Court adopted and applied the personal- jurisdiction analysis expounded by the United States Supreme Court in Ford Motor Co. v. Montana Eighth Judicial District Court, 592 U.S. 351 (2021). | 3 | 2024–2025 |
International Shoe Co. v. Washington
green
2 sentences2009Traditional Notions of Fair Play and Substantial Justice Turning to the requirement that the maintenance of Leytham's suit in Alabama "`does not offend "traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice,"'" World-Wide Volkswagen , 444 U.S. at 292 , 100 S.Ct. 559 (quoting International Shoe Co. v. Washington , 326 U.S. at 316 , 66 S.Ct. 154 , quoting in turn Milliken v. Meyer , 311 U.S. 457 , 463 , 61 S.Ct. 339 , 85 L.Ed. 278 (1940)); Burger King , 471 U.S. at 476 , 105 S.Ct. 2174 , DBI argues that the fundamental-fairness prong of the personal-jurisdiction test weighs against exercising 2009Traditional Notions of Fair Play and Substantial Justice Turning to the requirement that the maintenance of Leytham’s suit in Alabama “ ‘does not offend “traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice,” ’ ” World-Wide Volkswagen, 444 U.S. at 292 , 100 S.Ct. 559 (quoting International Shoe Co. v. Washington, 326 U.S. at 316 , 66 S.Ct. 154 , quoting in turn Milliken v. Meyer, 311 U.S. 457, 463 , 61 S.Ct. 339 , 85 L.Ed. 278 (1940)); Burger King, 471 U.S. at 476 , 105 S.Ct. 2174 , DBI argues that the fundamental-fairness prong of the personal-jurisdiction test weighs against exercising p | 3 | 2009–2024 |
Burger King Corp. v. Rudzewicz
green
2 sentences2009Traditional Notions of Fair Play and Substantial Justice Turning to the requirement that the maintenance of Leytham’s suit in Alabama “ ‘does not offend “traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice,” ’ ” World-Wide Volkswagen, 444 U.S. at 292 , 100 S.Ct. 559 (quoting International Shoe Co. v. Washington, 326 U.S. at 316 , 66 S.Ct. 154 , quoting in turn Milliken v. Meyer, 311 U.S. 457, 463 , 61 S.Ct. 339 , 85 L.Ed. 278 (1940)); Burger King, 471 U.S. at 476 , 105 S.Ct. 2174 , DBI argues that the fundamental-fairness prong of the personal-jurisdiction test weighs against exercising p 2009Traditional Notions of Fair Play and Substantial Justice Turning to the requirement that the maintenance of Leytham’s suit in Alabama “ ‘does not offend “traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice,” ’ ” World-Wide Volkswagen, 444 U.S. at 292 , 100 S.Ct. 559 (quoting International Shoe Co. v. Washington, 326 U.S. at 316 , 66 S.Ct. 154 , quoting in turn Milliken v. Meyer, 311 U.S. 457, 463 , 61 S.Ct. 339 , 85 L.Ed. 278 (1940)); Burger King, 471 U.S. at 476 , 105 S.Ct. 2174 , DBI argues that the fundamental-fairness prong of the personal-jurisdiction test weighs against exercising p | 3 | 2001–2009 |
World-Wide Volkswagen Corp. v. Woodson
green
2 sentences2009The Court stated in Alloy Wheels: “In Ex parte McInnis, this Court explained the application of the stream of commerce doctrine to a products liability case: “ ‘In World-Wide Volkswagen Corp. [v. Woodson], 444 U.S. [286] at 297-98, 100 S.Ct. 559 [(1980)], the Supreme Court stated that “[t]he forum State does not exceed its powers under the Due Process Clause if it asserts personal jurisdiction over a corporation that delivers its products into the stream of commerce with the expectation that they will be purchased by consumers in the forum State.” In Asahi Metal Industry Co., Ltd. v. Superior 2009Traditional Notions of Fair Play and Substantial Justice Turning to the requirement that the maintenance of Leytham’s suit in Alabama “ ‘does not offend “traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice,” ’ ” World-Wide Volkswagen, 444 U.S. at 292 , 100 S.Ct. 559 (quoting International Shoe Co. v. Washington, 326 U.S. at 316 , 66 S.Ct. 154 , quoting in turn Milliken v. Meyer, 311 U.S. 457, 463 , 61 S.Ct. 339 , 85 L.Ed. 278 (1940)); Burger King, 471 U.S. at 476 , 105 S.Ct. 2174 , DBI argues that the fundamental-fairness prong of the personal-jurisdiction test weighs against exercising p | 2 | 2009–2009 |
Milliken v. Meyer
green
2 sentences2009Traditional Notions of Fair Play and Substantial Justice Turning to the requirement that the maintenance of Leytham’s suit in Alabama “ ‘does not offend “traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice,” ’ ” World-Wide Volkswagen, 444 U.S. at 292 , 100 S.Ct. 559 (quoting International Shoe Co. v. Washington, 326 U.S. at 316 , 66 S.Ct. 154 , quoting in turn Milliken v. Meyer, 311 U.S. 457, 463 , 61 S.Ct. 339 , 85 L.Ed. 278 (1940)); Burger King, 471 U.S. at 476 , 105 S.Ct. 2174 , DBI argues that the fundamental-fairness prong of the personal-jurisdiction test weighs against exercising p 2009Traditional Notions of Fair Play and Substantial Justice Turning to the requirement that the maintenance of Leytham’s suit in Alabama “ ‘does not offend “traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice,” ’ ” World-Wide Volkswagen, 444 U.S. at 292 , 100 S.Ct. 559 (quoting International Shoe Co. v. Washington, 326 U.S. at 316 , 66 S.Ct. 154 , quoting in turn Milliken v. Meyer, 311 U.S. 457, 463 , 61 S.Ct. 339 , 85 L.Ed. 278 (1940)); Burger King, 471 U.S. at 476 , 105 S.Ct. 2174 , DBI argues that the fundamental-fairness prong of the personal-jurisdiction test weighs against exercising p | 2 | 2009–2009 |
Asahi Metal Industry Co. v. Superior Court of Cal., Solano Cty.
green
2 sentences2009The Court stated in Alloy Wheels: “In Ex parte McInnis, this Court explained the application of the stream of commerce doctrine to a products liability case: “ ‘In World-Wide Volkswagen Corp. [v. Woodson], 444 U.S. [286] at 297-98, 100 S.Ct. 559 [(1980)], the Supreme Court stated that “[t]he forum State does not exceed its powers under the Due Process Clause if it asserts personal jurisdiction over a corporation that delivers its products into the stream of commerce with the expectation that they will be purchased by consumers in the forum State.” In Asahi Metal Industry Co., Ltd. v. Superior 2009The Court stated in Alloy Wheels: “In Ex parte McInnis, this Court explained the application of the stream of commerce doctrine to a products liability case: “ ‘In World-Wide Volkswagen Corp. [v. Woodson], 444 U.S. [286] at 297-98, 100 S.Ct. 559 [(1980)], the Supreme Court stated that “[t]he forum State does not exceed its powers under the Due Process Clause if it asserts personal jurisdiction over a corporation that delivers its products into the stream of commerce with the expectation that they will be purchased by consumers in the forum State.” In Asahi Metal Industry Co., Ltd. v. Superior | 2 | 2009–2009 |
Ex Parte Amsouth Bank, N.A.
green
2 sentences2006We stated: "The defendants make much of the fact that the agreements in Keelean [v. Central Bank of the South, 544 So.2d 153 (Ala.1989)], and Ex parte AmSouth Bank, [N.A., 675 So.2d 1305 (Ala.1996)], contained forum-selection clauses indicating that Alabama law would govern. 2006We stated: “The defendants make much of the fact that the agreements in Keelean [v. Central Bank of the South, 544 So.2d 153 (Ala.1989) ], and Ex parte AmSouth Bank, [NA., 675 So.2d 1305 (Ala.1996) ], contained forum-selection clauses indicating that Alabama law would govern. | 2 | 2006–2006 |
Keelean v. Central Bank of the South
green
2 sentences2006We stated: "The defendants make much of the fact that the agreements in Keelean [v. Central Bank of the South, 544 So.2d 153 (Ala.1989)], and Ex parte AmSouth Bank, [N.A., 675 So.2d 1305 (Ala.1996)], contained forum-selection clauses indicating that Alabama law would govern. 2006We stated: “The defendants make much of the fact that the agreements in Keelean [v. Central Bank of the South, 544 So.2d 153 (Ala.1989) ], and Ex parte AmSouth Bank, [NA., 675 So.2d 1305 (Ala.1996) ], contained forum-selection clauses indicating that Alabama law would govern. | 2 | 2006–2006 |
Datskow v. Teledyne
green
1 sentence2014If a defendant fails to do so, then he may be found to have waived his personal jurisdiction defense, notwithstanding its inclusion in a responsive pleading. "5One apparent aberration to this pattern is Datskow v. Teledyne, Inc., 899 F.2d 1298 (2nd Cir. 1990), wherein the Second Circuit classified a four[]-month delay in challenging personal jurisdiction as a waiver of the defense. | 1 | 2014–2014 |
Plunkett v. Valhalla Investment Services, Inc.
green
1 sentence2014The longer the time interval, the more likely it is that courts will find a waiver. 29 1130184, 1130231 See Hamilton, 197 F.3d at 62 (determining that defendant forfeited personal jurisdiction defense by failing to raise it for four years after inclusion of defense in answer); Continental Bank, N.A. v. Meyer, 10 F.3d 1293, 1297 (7th Cir. 1993) (finding waiver where defendants did not actively contest personal jurisdiction for more than two and a half years after listing the defense in their answer); Hunger, [ 203 F.3d 835 ] (defendant waived personal jurisdiction defense by waiting more than t | 1 | 2014–2014 |
Calder v. Jones
green
1 sentence2003For purposes of a personal-jurisdiction analysis, when the allegations of the complaint are contradicted by the defendant's affidavits, courts "`construe all reasonable inferences in favor of the plaintiff.'" Robinson v. Giarmarco & Bill, P.C., 74 F.3d 253, 255 (11th Cir. 1996) (quoting Madara v. Hall, 916 F.2d 1510, 1514 (11th Cir.1990)). [8] The article alleged that the plaintiff, an actress, "drank so heavily as to prevent her from fulfilling her professional obligations." 465 U.S. at 789 n. 9, 104 S.Ct. 1482 . [9] Section 8-6-12(e)(1) provides, in pertinent part: "[E]very issuer which prop | 1 | 2003–2003 |
Insurance Corp. of Ireland v. Compagnie Des Bauxites De Guinee
green
2 sentences2001In Burger King Corp. v. Rudzewicz, 471 U.S. 462 , 105 S.Ct. 2174 , 85 L.Ed.2d 528 (1985), the United States Supreme Court noted: "[B]ecause the personal jurisdiction requirement is a waivable right, there are a `variety of legal arrangements' by which a litigant may give `express or implied consent to the personal jurisdiction of the court.' Insurance Corp. of Ireland v. Compagnie des Bauxites de Guinee, [ 456 U.S. 694, 703 , 102 S.Ct. 2099 , 72 L.Ed.2d 492 (1982)]. 2001In Burger King Corp. v. Rudzewicz, 471 U.S. 462 , 105 S.Ct. 2174 , 85 L.Ed.2d 528 (1985), the United States Supreme Court noted: "[B]ecause the personal jurisdiction requirement is a waivable right, there are a `variety of legal arrangements' by which a litigant may give `express or implied consent to the personal jurisdiction of the court.' Insurance Corp. of Ireland v. Compagnie des Bauxites de Guinee, [ 456 U.S. 694, 703 , 102 S.Ct. 2099 , 72 L.Ed.2d 492 (1982)]. | 1 | 2001–2001 |
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.