Mitchell Energy Corp. v. Mary Helen Coal Co., Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• authorizing transfer under section 1406(a) where defendant’s activities insufficient to meet long-arm statute but action could have been brought in transferee court
• finding no personal jurisdiction despite the defendant’s “[e]xchange of letters and telephone communications with a party in the District of Columbia”
• “Exchange of letters and telephone communications with a party in the District of Columbia alone is not considered a jurisdictionally significant contact by District of Columbia courts.”
• “Exchange of letters and telephone communications with a party in the District of Columbia alone is not considered a jurisdictionally significant contact by District of Columbia courts.”
• “[T]he mere delivery of documents ... does not confer jurisdiction under 423(a)(1).”
• “[T]he mere delivery of documents . . .does not confer jurisdiction under 423(a)(1).”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).