Charles F. Willis, Jr. v. Elizabeth Firestone Willis Charles F. Willis, Jr. v. Elizabeth Firestone Willis, Cleveland Trust Company

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that party “first possessed a claim for contribution with respect to obligations incurred on [loan] note” when “the note had been honored in full”
• noting that “District of Columbia courts have interpreted section 13-423(b) as a bar to claims unrelated to the acts forming the basis of personal jurisdiction” (citations omitted)
• making telephone calls to the District provides insufficient affiliating circumstances to empower District court to exercise jurisdiction over nonresident defendant
• applying the “contracting for services” provision to the contracting parties only
• executor “was subject to the court’s jurisdiction to the same extent that [decedent] would have been”
• executor “was 5 subject to the court’s jurisdiction to the same extent that [decedent] would have been”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).