Holocaust Victims of v. OTP Bank

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 constitution requirement for general jurisdiction [ ] is 'considerably more stringent' than that required for specific jurisdiction\
• finding that “the jurisdictional contacts of a subsidiary corporation are not imputed to the parent”
• noting that a corporation can only be subject to the general jurisdiction of the forum state if its “affiliations with the [forum] State are so ‘continuous and systematic’ as to render them essentially at home in the forum State”
• explaining the “general rule” that, when evaluating personal jurisdiction, corporate parents and subsidiaries are treated as separate entities
• finding “no merit” in the argument that invoking the Fifth Amendment “relaxes the minimum-contacts inquiry”
• granting writ where erroneous finding of personal jurisdiction on motion to dismiss would effectively coerce defendant into massive settlement

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).