Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
4 canonical passages across 4 cases, quoted by 104 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side: they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from Spiegel v. Schulmann.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Spiegel v. Schulmann Anchor | green | “a district court's personal jurisdiction is determined by the law of the state in which the court is located.” | 31 |
| 2 | Sonera Holding B.V. v. Cukurova Holding A.S. | green | “a company has engaged in such a continuous and systematic course of doing business in new york that a finding of its presence in new york is warranted.” | 31 |
| 3 | Marvel Characters, Inc. v. Kirby | green | “statutory basis for exercising personal jurisdiction.” | 30 |
| 4 | Pdk Labs, Inc., Plaintiff-Counter-Defendant-Appellee v. Mitchell K. Friedlander, Defendant-Counter-Claimant-Appellant | green | “specifically provides for national service of process.” | 12 |
A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment: for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.