Bell Helicopter Textron, Inc. v. HeliQwest International, Ltd.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• concluding that, “[g]iven the very low probability that the lack of discovery affected the outcome” of the case, the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying jurisdictional discovery
• holding that the district court did not abuse its discretion when denying jurisdictional discovery “given the very low probability that the lack of discovery affected the outcome of [the] case”
• holding that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying jurisdictional discovery where there was a “very low probability that the lack of discovery affected the outcome of the case”
• holding that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying jurisdictional discovery where there was a “very low probability that the lack of discovery affected the outcome of the case”
• holding that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying jurisdictional discovery where there was a “very low probability that the lack of discovery affected the outcome of the case”
• holding that although the lessor could potentially have foreseen that the helicopter would be used in western states with national forests, “[a] general hope that a party will use a product in a general region is too remote an aspiration to qualify as purposeful availment in a specific state”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).