Legal Opinion
Paisley Park Enters., Inc. v. Boxill
District Court, D. Maine
Decided February 22, 2019No. Case No. 17-cv-1212 (WMW/TNL)PublishedCited by 36 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Contact that is "random, fortuitous, and attenuated" does not satisfy the first factor. Viasystems, Inc. v. EBM-Papst St. Georgen GmbH & Co., KG , 646 F.3d 589, 594 (8th Cir. 2011). For example, scattered communication via emails and phone calls to individuals within the forum state does not justify a court's exercise of personal jurisdiction over the defendant. Id. Similarly, a defendant's communication with an out-of-state third party, who in turn has contacts with the forum state, is a contact with the forum state that is too tenuous to satisfy the first factor. See Nash Finch Co. v.…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Ashcroft v. IqbalSupreme Court of the United States · 2009
- Bell Atlantic Corp. v. TwomblySupreme Court of the United States · 2007
- Asahi Metal Industry Co. v. Superior Court of Cal., Solano Cty.Supreme Court of the United States · 1987
- Calder v. JonesSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Dakota Industries, Inc. v. Dakota Sportswear, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1991
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by36 opinions
- 3M Company v. StarsiakDistrict Court, D. Minnesota · 2020
- Bare Body Laser Spa Inc. v. Bankers Healthcare Group, LLCDistrict Court, D. Minnesota · 2024
- Behr v. RB Minneapolis Management, LLCDistrict Court, D. Minnesota · 2025
- Behr v. RB Minneapolis Management, LLCDistrict Court, D. Minnesota · 2025
- Benjemin Allen Thayer and Emily Hay v. BMO Bank, N.A.District Court, D. Minnesota · 2026
31 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.