Campbell v. Botts

How courts have described this case

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

• recognizing that “[a] plaintiff must prevail on all three prongs to establish specific jurisdiction” (citing Mukarker v. City of Philadelphia, 178 F. Supp. 3d 8, 10 (D. Mass. 2016)
• “The Court must analyze the jurisdictional issue based on the officer’s personal contacts with Massachusetts.” (emphasis in original)
• first citing J. McIntyre Mach., Ltd. v. Nicastro, 564 U.S. 873, 880 (2011), then citing Burnham v. Super. Court of Cal., 495 U.S. 604, 619 (1990)
• first citing J. McIntyre Mach., Ltd. v. Nicastro, 564 U.S. 873, 880 (2011), then citing Burnham v. Superior Court of California, 495 U.S. 604, 703 (1982)
• first citing J. McIntyre Mach., Ltd. v. Nicastro, 564 U.S. 873, 880 (2011), then citing Burnham v. Super. Court of Cal., 495 U.S. 604, 619 (1990)
• “Because [plaintiff] failed to make sufficient factual allegations to show any personal in-forum contacts of the Individual Defendants, this Court could not find personal jurisdiction on the basis of [their] activities as company owners or managers.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).