Mary E. Bonner Johnson v. Richard W. Woodcock

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that evidence that nonresident party collaborated with a resident and had a publishing relationship with another did not establish general jurisdiction
• an issue that was not raised “in the district court or in the briefs or during oral argu‐ ment before this court” but raised “belatedly by way of a petition for rehearing” was waived
• conclusory allegations did not satisfy plaintiffs burden to establish a prima facie case regarding jurisdiction.
• “Specific jurisdiction can only be found if the controversy is related to or arises out of the defendant’s contact with the forum state.”
• contract and related contacts related to agreement by nonresident defendant, Minnesota resident, and Minnesota publishing company to publish a test insufficient where the plaintiff made no effort to explain how the contacts related to his claims
• “General jurisdiction exists where the contacts between the defendant and the forum state are ‘continuous and systematic’ even if there is no relationship between the contacts and the cause of action.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).