Search Results

February 25, 2013 | New York Law Journal

Personal Jurisdiction From E-Contacts Remains an Unpredictable Issue

Advances in technology continue to have an interesting and quixotic effect on the way in which courts grapple with personal jurisdiction. Commercial interaction across state and international

1 minute read

Shipp v. State of Texas

Publication Date: 2011-02-03
Practice Area:
Industry:
Date Filed: 2011-02-02
Court: Tex. Crim. App.
Judge: Price, J.
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: NO. PD-1346-09

Price, J., announced the judgment of the Court and delivered an opinion in which Keasler, Hervey and Cochran, JJ., joined. Meyers, J., filed a concurring opinion. Keller, PJ., filed a dissenting opini

Lazer Spot, Inc., Appellant v. Hiring Partners, Inc., Appellee

Publication Date: 2012-10-22
Practice Area:
Industry:
Date Filed: 2012-10-18
Court: Tex. App. Dist. 6
Judge: Bailey C. Moseley Justice
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 06-12-00044-CV

Before Morriss, C.J., Carter and Moseley, JJ.Opinion by Justice MoseleyOPINIONHiring Partners, Inc. (HPI) and Lazer Spot, Inc. (Lazer Spot) filed competing motions for summary judgment

Jose Gomez and Evelyn Gomez, Plaintiff v. Brodsky Organization, Inc., Brodsky Organization LLC, 12 East 86th Street LLC, and Dean and Deluca Madison Avenue, Inc., Defendants, 104142/08

Publication Date: 2013-02-15
Practice Area:
Industry:
Court: Supreme Court, New York County, Part 7
Judge: Justice Paul Wooten
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 104142/08

Cite as: Jose Gomez v. Brodsky Organization, Inc., 104142/08, NYLJ 1202588017061, at *1 (Sup., NY, Decided January 18, 2013)Justice Paul Wootenp clas

Bill Ashlock, Plaintiff v. Jonathan Slone, Defendant, 10 Civ. 453

Publication Date: 2012-08-08
Practice Area:
Industry:
Court: U. S. District Court, Southern District
Judge: District Judge Paul Engelmayer
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 10 Civ. 453

Cite as: Ashlock v. Slone, 10 Civ. 453, NYLJ 1202566238381, at *1 (SDNY, Decided July 26, 2012)District Judge Paul EngelmayerDecide

Semple v. Eyeblaster Inc., 08 Civ. 9004

Publication Date: 2009-06-03
Practice Area:
Industry:
Date Filed: 2009-05-26
Court: U.S. District Court for the Southern District
Judge: Harold Baer
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 08 Civ. 9004

District Judge Harold Baer U.S. DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK Counsel for Plaintiff Elizabeth Semple: Marc Monoah Isaac Marc M. Isaac

Lyons Partnership v. Morris Costumes, Inc. (Summary)

Publication Date: 2001-03-20
Practice Area:
Industry:
Date Filed: 2001-03-16
Court: 4th Cir.
Judge:
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 99-2255

PUBLISHEDUNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALSFOR THE FOURTH CIRCUITLYONS PARTNERSHIP, L.P., a TexasLimited Partnership,Plaintiff-Appellant,v.

In re Gildan Activewear Inc. Securities Litigation, 08 Civ. 5048

Publication Date: 2009-07-14
Practice Area:
Industry:
Date Filed: 2009-07-01
Court: U.S. District Court for the Southern District
Judge: Harold Baer
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 08 Civ. 5048

District Judge Harold Baer U.S. DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK Counsel for Plaintiffs: David Avi Rosenfeld, Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbi

Bumble Bee Seafoods LLC v. UFS Industries Inc.

Publication Date: 2004-07-29
Practice Area:
Industry:
Court: U.S. District Court for the Southern District
Judge:
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number:

U.S. District Court Southern District of New York Judge Stein Should the makers of tuna salad be preliminarily enjoined from stating on its label that it is "Made with

In Re Wireless Telephone Services Antitrust Litigation

Publication Date: 2003-08-22
Practice Area:
Industry:
Court: U.S. District Court for the Southern District
Judge:
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number:

Plaintiffs bring this antitrust class action against the five families of companies that provide nationwide wireless telephone service. Plaintiffs contend that each defendant's power in the market