Mario Valente Collezioni, Ltd. v. Confezioni Semeraro Paolo, S.R.L., Confezioni Mario Valente-Firenze, S.R.L. And Paolo Semeraro

How courts have described this case

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

• “district courts must conduct a two-part analysis, looking first to the state’s long-arm statute and then analyzing whether jurisdiction comports with federal due process.”
• sufficient for personal jurisdiction under § 302(a)(1) for there to be a contract to ship goods to New York and the goods were shipped
• “As there was a contract to ship goods to New York, entered into by plaintiff and defendants, and goods were shipped under that contract, the district court correctly concluded jurisdiction was proper.”
• rejecting conspiracy theory of personal jurisdiction without permitting jurisdictional discovery
• federal law of minimum contacts determines- whether exercise of jurisdiction is constitutional
• affirming district court’s finding of long-arm jurisdiction under § 302(a)(1

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).