County Security Agency v. The Ohio Department of Commerce v. Michael J. Betzold, Intervenor-Appellant

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that “a motion to intervene is fundamentally incompatible with an objection to personal jurisdiction”
• noting that the court previously “returned the case to the district court for a ruling on the motion to dissolve” the preliminary injunction
• finding a hearing to be required even though defendant “did not contest the factual basis underlying the stipulated preliminary injunction” but only “challeng[ed] the legal basis for the issuance of any future injunction against him”
• finding a hearing to be required even though defendant “did not contest the factual basis underlying the stipulated preliminary injunction” but only “challeng[ed] the legal basis for the issuance of any future injunction against him”
• “In order to object to a court’s exercise of personal jurisdiction, it is no longer necessary to enter a ‘special appearance.’”
• “In order to object to a court’s exercise of personal jurisdiction, it is no longer necessary to enter a ‘special appearance.’”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).