Merrick v. La Hache

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that “courts have applied Grunewald and its progeny to civil conspiracies” and holding that “acts of concealment that follow completion of the conspiracies’ main objective are generally not considered to be part of the conspiracy”
• criticizing the plaintiffs’ jurisdictional discovery request as “ill-defined and overly broad” and concluding that the “[p]laintiffs have failed to specifically tailor their discovery requests to jurisdictional matters”
• “[I]f any conspiratorial jurisdiction survives Walden, a plaintiff pursuing such a theory must allege that the defendant knew of the co-conspirator’s acts in the forum.”
• “For corporations, [general jurisdiction can be exercised in] a[] [district] . . . in which the corporation is fairly regarded as at home[.]”
• “For corporations, [general jurisdiction can be exercised in] a[] [district] . . . in which the corporation is fairly regarded as at home[.]”
• “Peripheral and tangential events occurring in the district will not establish venue.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).