Legal Opinion · Dissent

United States v. Swiss American Bank, Ltd.

Court of Appeals for the First Circuit

Decided December 27, 2001No. 00-2502Published

1DissentLipez, Circuit Judge

The majority concludes that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying jurisdictional discovery. I respectfully disagree with that conclusion, and there*628fore dissent. My disagreement with the majority stems in large part from the majority’s treatment of Calder v. Jones, 465 U.S. 783, 104 S.Ct. 1482, 79 L.Ed.2d 804 (1984). In assessing whether the government’s tort claims arise out of or relate to SAB’s contacts with the forum, the majority states that, “since Calder’s ‘effects’ test is relevant only to the purposeful availment prong, it cannot be used to strengthen the…

2Cases cited48 opinions

  1. International Shoe Co. v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1945
  2. Burger King Corp. v. RudzewiczSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
  3. Steel Co. v. Citizens for a Better EnvironmentSupreme Court of the United States · 1998
  4. World-Wide Volkswagen Corp. v. WoodsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
  5. Helicopteros Nacionales De Colombia, S. A. v. HallSupreme Court of the United States · 1984

43 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API