Casteel v. Clarence Hodson & Co.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the New York long-arm statute is not coextensive with the Due Process Clause
• holding that the New York long-arm statute is not coextensive with the Due Process Clause
• holding no jurisdiction under § 302(a)(2) over Austrian defendant where defendant was not in New York when agreement on which fraud action was based was made
• finding that CPLR § 302(a)(1) also applies “to actions in tort when supported by a sufficient showing of facts”
• sustaining jurisdiction because plaintiffs personal injury claim resulting from the use of a defective hammer arose from “the purposeful activities engaged in by [defendant]” in New York “in connection with the sale of its products in the New York market”
• purpose of section 302’s draftsmen was “to subject non-residents to personal jurisdiction when they commit acts within the state” (citation and internal quotation marks omitted)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).