Legal Opinion

David Schneider v. Michael Hardesty

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit

Decided February 23, 2012No. 09-3892PublishedCited by 160 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

KAREN NELSON MOORE, Circuit Judge.

Plaintiff David M. Schneider (“Schneider”) appeals the district court’s dismissal of his claims against defendant Thomas Nelson (“Nelson”) for lack of personal jurisdiction. Schneider argues that the district court improperly applied the preponderance-of-the-evidence standard, as opposed to the prima facie standard, in determining whether Schneider pleaded facts sufficient to establish personal jurisdiction over Nelson. Schneider further argues that the district court erred in finding there is no personal jurisdiction over Nelson in Ohio. We conclude…

2Cases cited28 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. World-Wide Volkswagen Corp. v. WoodsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
  4. Hanson v. DencklaSupreme Court of the United States · 1958
  5. Goodyear Dunlop Tires Operations, S. A. v. BrownSupreme Court of the United States · 2011

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

3Cited by160 opinions

  1. MAG IAS Holdings v. Rainer Schm�ckleCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2017
  2. Kevin Malone v. Stanley Black & Decker, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2020
  3. Means v. United States Conference of Catholic BishopsCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2016
  4. Russell v. SNFAIllinois Supreme Court · 2013
  5. Acrylicon USA, LLC v. Silikal GMBHCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2021

155 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