Fifth Circuit· 8/12/2010

Clemens v. McNamee

Citations

615 F.3d 374
38 Media L. Rep. (BNA) 2323
2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 16718
2010 WL 3175979

How courts have described this case

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

noting that “the relevant contacts” for a defamation claim “are the allegedly defamatory remarks” themselves
holding Texas courts lacked specific jurisdiction over New York resident who allegedly defamed Texas resident in statements to federal investigators
emphasizing \Calder's requirement that the forum be the focal point of the story” in evaluating \personal jurisdiction against the defaming defendant” (quotations omitted)
finding no personal jurisdiction where the allegedly defamatory statements did not concern activity in the forum state, were not made in the forum state, and were not directed to the forum state
“The plaintiff bears the burden of establishing personal jurisdiction over a non-resident defendant and that burden is met by making a prima facie showing.”
“To support personal jurisdiction against the defaming defendant, this court has emphasized Calder’s requirement that the forum be the focal point of the story.” (quotation omitted)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Davis, Smith, Haynes

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

43 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

29 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases named Clemens v. McNamee

4 other CourtListener records share this case name.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.