11 Missouri opinions name it 2 courts 1982–2024 3 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Missouri 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 |
|---|---|---|
Hanson v. Dencklagreen2 sentences2023“It is well-established a plaintiff may not use the actions of a third party to satisfy the due process requirement of the specific personal jurisdiction analysis.” LG Chem, 599 S.W.3d at 903 (citing PPG, 560 S.W.3d at 893 n.5). “‘The unilateral activity of those who claim some relationship with a nonresident defendant cannot satisfy the requirement of contact with the forum State.’” Helicopteros Nacionales de Colombia, S.A. v. Hall, 466 U.S. 408, 417 (1984) (quoting Hanson v. Denckla, 357 U.S. 235, 253 (1958)). 19 C. 2013“When evaluating minimum contacts, the focus is on whether ‘there be some act by which the defendant purposefully avails itself of the privilege of conducting activities within the forum State, thus invoking the benefits and protections of its laws.’ ” Bryant, 310 S.W.3d at 232 (quoting Hanson v. Denckla, 357 U.S. 235, 253 , 78 S.Ct. 1228 , 2 L.Ed.2d 1283 (1958)). | 1 | 2 |
International Shoe Co. v. Washingtongreen2 sentences2013Turning to the second step of the personal-jurisdiction analysis, the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution requires that a defendant’s contacts with the forum be sufficiently extensive so that “maintenance of the suit does not offend traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice.” Int’l Shoe Co. v. Washington, 326 U.S. 310, 316 , 66 S.Ct. 154 , 90 L.Ed. 95 (1945) (citation and internal quotation marks omitted). 2013Turning to the second step of the personal-jurisdiction analysis, the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution requires that a defendant’s contacts with the forum be sufficiently extensive so that “maintenance of the suit does not offend traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice.” Int’l Shoe Co. v. Washington, 326 U.S. 310, 316 , 66 S.Ct. 154 , 90 L.Ed. 95 (1945) (citation and internal quotation marks omitted). | 1 | 2 |
Willis v. Willisgreen1 sentence2024In yet another example, in a spousal support dispute, the date on which wife’s attorney first appeared on the record with regard to husband’s motion to modify was held to constitute a “general appearance waiving the necessity of any further effort at making personal service.” Willis v. Willis, 50 S.W.3d 378, 392 (Mo. App. W.D. 2001). | 1 | 1 |
Helicopteros Nacionales De Colombia, S. A. v. Hallgreen1 sentence2023“It is well-established a plaintiff may not use the actions of a third party to satisfy the due process requirement of the specific personal jurisdiction analysis.” LG Chem, 599 S.W.3d at 903 (citing PPG, 560 S.W.3d at 893 n.5). “‘The unilateral activity of those who claim some relationship with a nonresident defendant cannot satisfy the requirement of contact with the forum State.’” Helicopteros Nacionales de Colombia, S.A. v. Hall, 466 U.S. 408, 417 (1984) (quoting Hanson v. Denckla, 357 U.S. 235, 253 (1958)). 19 C. | 1 | 1 |
Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. Superior Court of Cal., San Francisco Cty.green1 sentence2020PPG, 560 S.W.3d at 893 n.5; see also Bristol-Myers, 137 S. Ct. at 1781 (“[A] defendant’s relationship with a . . . third party, standing alone, is an insufficient basis for jurisdiction.” (second alteration in original)). | 1 | 1 |
Walker v. Grunergreen1 sentence2011Walker v. Gruner, 875 S.W.2d 587, 589 (Mo.App. | 1 | 1 |
United Advertising Agency, Inc. v. Robbgreen2 sentences1982United Advertising held that the individual defendant had not waived the personal jurisdiction defense and, more or less as an afterthought, added without citation of authority that because the corporate defendant “never filed a response to the complaint or otherwise pleaded or moved, the in personam jurisdictional defense is waived and this Court’s default judgment is valid.” 391 F.Supp. at 632 . 1982United Advertising held that the individual defendant had not waived the personal jurisdiction defense and, more or less as an afterthought, added without citation of authority that because the corporate defendant "never filed a response to the complaint or otherwise pleaded or moved, the in personam jurisdictional defense is waived and this Court's default judgment is valid." 391 F.Supp. at 632 . | 1 | 1 |
Christiansen v. Capengreen2 sentences1982E.g., United Advertising Agency, Inc. v. Robb, 391 F.Supp. 626, 632 (M.D.N.C.1975); Thrift v. Vi-Vin Products, Inc., 134 Ga.App. 717, 718 , 215 S.E.2d 709, 710 (1975); Christiansen v. Capen, 139 Vt. 591 , 433 A.2d 289, 290 (1981). 1982E.g., United Advertising Agency, Inc. v. Robb, 391 F.Supp. 626, 632 (M.D.N.C.1975); Thrift v. Vi-Vin Products, Inc., 134 Ga.App. 717, 718 , 215 S.E.2d 709, 710 (1975); Christiansen v. Capen, 139 Vt. 591 , 433 A.2d 289, 290 (1981). | 1 | 1 |
Thrift v. Vi-Vin Products, Inc.green2 sentences1982E.g., United Advertising Agency, Inc. v. Robb, 391 F.Supp. 626, 632 (M.D.N.C.1975); Thrift v. Vi-Vin Products, Inc., 134 Ga.App. 717, 718 , 215 S.E.2d 709, 710 (1975); Christiansen v. Capen, 139 Vt. 591 , 433 A.2d 289, 290 (1981). 1982E.g., United Advertising Agency, Inc. v. Robb, 391 F.Supp. 626, 632 (M.D.N.C.1975); Thrift v. Vi-Vin Products, Inc., 134 Ga.App. 717, 718 , 215 S.E.2d 709, 710 (1975); Christiansen v. Capen, 139 Vt. 591 , 433 A.2d 289, 290 (1981). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Missouri. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
State ex rel. Cedar Crest Apartments, LLC and Peterson Properties, Inc. d/b/a The Peterson Companies, Relators v. The Honorable Jack Grate
green
2 sentences2024“As a result, a personal jurisdiction analysis will involve (though, usually, only implicitly) imputing the contacts of a defendant corporation's agent(s) to that corporation.” Id. 2020"As a result, a personal jurisdiction analysis will involve (though, usually, only implicitly) imputing the contacts of a defendant corporation's agent(s) to that corporation." Id. (citing section 506.500.1 of the long-arm statute, which expressly states jurisdictional acts can be performed "in person or through an agent."). | 2 | 2020–2024 |
State v. McShane
green
2 sentences2023“It is well-established a plaintiff may not use the actions of a third party to satisfy the due process requirement of the specific personal jurisdiction analysis.” LG Chem, 599 S.W.3d at 903 (citing PPG, 560 S.W.3d at 893 n.5). “‘The unilateral activity of those who claim some relationship with a nonresident defendant cannot satisfy the requirement of contact with the forum State.’” Helicopteros Nacionales de Colombia, S.A. v. Hall, 466 U.S. 408, 417 (1984) (quoting Hanson v. Denckla, 357 U.S. 235, 253 (1958)). 19 C. 2020PPG, 560 S.W.3d at 893 n.5; see also Bristol-Myers, 137 S. Ct. at 1781 (“[A] defendant’s relationship with a . . . third party, standing alone, is an insufficient basis for jurisdiction.” (second alteration in original)). | 2 | 2020–2023 |
Zippo Manufacturing Co. v. Zippo Dot Com, Inc.
green
1 sentence2015Mr. Andra maintains that Missouri has jurisdiction over Left Gate because: (1) the nature, quality, and quantity of Left Gate’s contacts with Missouri constitute sufficient minimum contacts to establish personal jurisdiction under a traditional analysis of specific personal jurisdiction; (2) Left Gate engaged in sufficient interactive contact with customers through the eBay auction website to establish personal jurisdiction under the specific personal jurisdiction test in Zippo Manufacturing Co. v. Zippo Dot Com, Inc., 952 F.Supp. 1119 (W.D.Pa.1997); and, (3) Left Gate had substantial systemat | 1 | 2015–2015 |
Bryant v. Smith Interior Design Group, Inc.
green
1 sentence2013“When evaluating minimum contacts, the focus is on whether ‘there be some act by which the defendant purposefully avails itself of the privilege of conducting activities within the forum State, thus invoking the benefits and protections of its laws.’ ” Bryant, 310 S.W.3d at 232 (quoting Hanson v. Denckla, 357 U.S. 235, 253 , 78 S.Ct. 1228 , 2 L.Ed.2d 1283 (1958)). | 1 | 2013–2013 |
Whirlpool Corp. v. Certain Underwriters at Lloyd's London
green
2 sentences1998Synidcate, 87 N.Y.2d 530 , 640 N.Y.S.2d 479 , 663 N.E.2d 635 (1996); Whirlpool Corp. v. Certain Underwriters at Lloyd’s of London, 278 Ill.App.3d 175 , 214 Ill.Dec. 901 , 662 N.E.2d 467 (1996); In re Delta Am. 1998Synidcate, 87 N.Y.2d 530 , 640 N.Y.S.2d 479 , 663 N.E.2d 635 (1996); Whirlpool Corp. v. Certain Underwriters at Lloyd’s of London, 278 Ill.App.3d 175 , 214 Ill.Dec. 901 , 662 N.E.2d 467 (1996); In re Delta Am. | 1 | 1998–1998 |
Brooke Group Ltd. v. JCH Syndicate 488
green
2 sentences1998Synidcate, 87 N.Y.2d 530 , 640 N.Y.S.2d 479 , 663 N.E.2d 635 (1996); Whirlpool Corp. v. Certain Underwriters at Lloyd’s of London, 278 Ill.App.3d 175 , 214 Ill.Dec. 901 , 662 N.E.2d 467 (1996); In re Delta Am. 1998Synidcate, 87 N.Y.2d 530 , 640 N.Y.S.2d 479 , 663 N.E.2d 635 (1996); Whirlpool Corp. v. Certain Underwriters at Lloyd’s of London, 278 Ill.App.3d 175 , 214 Ill.Dec. 901 , 662 N.E.2d 467 (1996); In re Delta Am. | 1 | 1998–1998 |
Crouch v. Crouch
green
1 sentence1994Crouch v. Crouch, 641 S.W.2d 86 , 90-91 n. 4 (Mo.banc 1982); State ex rel. | 1 | 1994–1994 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
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.