Charles Gendler & Co. v. Telecom Equipment Corp.

How courts have described this case

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

• stating New Jersey courts exercise jurisdiction over non-resident defendants to the extent permitted by the United States 3 A-1956-15T2 Constitution
• “the system through which the manufacturer distributes its products evidences the manufacturer’s purposeful penetration of the market”
• distribution of products nationwide gives rise to reasonable expectation that manufacturer is subject to jurisdiction in every state
• “A foreign manufacturer that purposefully avails itself of [state legal and economic benefits] should be subject to personal jurisdiction, even though its products are distributed by independent companies or by an independent, but wholly-owned, subsidiary.”
• “A foreign manufacturer that purposefully avails itself of [state legal and economic benefits] should be subject to personal jurisdiction, even though its products are distributed by independent companies or by an independent, but wholly-owned, subsidiary.”
• adopting stream of commerce theory when considering extra-territorial jurisdiction

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).