Moncrief Oil International, Inc. v. Oao Gazprom, Gazprom Export, LLC, and Gazprom Marketing & Trading, Ltd.

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 “the Gazprom Defendants attended the two Texas meetings where they accepted the alleged trade secrets regarding a proposed Texas joint venture, which is the crux of the matter,” satisfied the Texas long-arm statute
• acknowledging that defending a suit in another state is inherently burdensome to all nonresidents but that “[d]istance alone cannot ordinarily defeat jurisdiction”
• holding defendants' alleged tortious conduct in California against a Texas resident was insufficient to confer specific jurisdiction over defendants as to plaintiff's tortious interference claims
• holding when multiple claims arise out of nonresident defendant’s different forum contacts, plaintiff must establish specific jurisdiction for each claim
• noting that supreme court had previously found jurisdiction over nonresident with no physical ties to Texas when out-of-state transaction “was actively and successfully solicited in Texas”
• stating that courts look only to the defendant’s contacts with Texas

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).