Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
This launched a separate line of reasoning with regard to jurisdiction in Internet cases focused on the specific characteristics of the web, and was cited by Hearst Corp. v. Goldberger. Within the same year of the Bensusan decision, Zippo Manufacturing Co. v. Zippo Dot Com gave rise to the Zippo test for personal jurisdiction in Internet cases.
The effects doctrine is an offshoot of the territorial principle. Briefly, the effects doctrine says that if the effects of extraterritorial behavior or crimes adversely affect commerce or harm citizens within the United States, then jurisdiction in a U.S. court is permissible. The first case to establish the effects doctrine was United States v.
Zippo is a landmark opinion regarding personal jurisdiction for courts deciding Internet-oriented disputes, and it is one of the most frequently cited Internet law precedents. The case established a standard of jurisdictional analysis now known as the "Zippo test," or the "Zippo sliding scale test."
Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. Superior Court of California, San Francisco County, 582 U.S. ___ (2017), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that California courts lacked personal jurisdiction over the defendant on claims brought by plaintiffs who are not California residents and did not suffer their alleged injury in California. [1]
Pages in category "United States Internet case law" The following 112 pages are in this category, out of 112 total. ... Personal jurisdiction in Internet cases in the ...
Pages in category "United States personal jurisdiction case law" The following 24 pages are in this category, out of 24 total. This list may not reflect recent changes .
Jan. 16—The state Supreme Court on Tuesday ruled personal injury lawsuits against New Mexico tribal casinos cannot be brought in state court — a landmark decision that settles a long-running ...
Personal jurisdiction in internet cases in the United States Personal jurisdiction CompuServe, Inc. v. Patterson [ 1 ] was a court case heard before the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals which held that contacts and contracts negotiated through the Internet with a party in a different state were sufficient to grant personal jurisdiction in that state.