Digi-Tel Holdings, Inc. v. Proteq Telecommunications (Pte), Ltd., Brustuen International, Inc., Intervenor

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that “dozens of letters and faxes and numerous phone calls” alone did not establish personal jurisdiction
• noting that “Minnesota has an obvious interest in providing a local forum in which its residents may litigate claims”
• explaining that, although the shipment of samples to the forum has relevance, “its effect is minimal”
• stating that “courts have hesitated to use unsuccessful settlement discussions as ‘contacts’ for jurisdictional purposes” because “[g]iving jurisdictional significance to such activities may work against public policy by hindering the settlement of claims”
• affirming dismissal for lack of specific jurisdiction where defendant sent letters and faxes and made telephone calls to forum and shipped four samples to forum
• recognizing public policy in favor of negotiations and settlement

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).