People ex rel. Prieston v. Nassau County Sheriff's Dept.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding these contacts were insufficient to establish constitutionally required minimum contacts
• addressing only the first three factors of minimum contacts analysis and not reaching fourth and fifth factors where first three factors not met
• finding no jurisdiction where defendants did “nothing to ‘tether[]’ the effect of their actions to [the forum]” (first alteration in original
• finding a lack of “purposeful avail[ment]” of Minnesota’s “benefits and protections” where plaintiff made a “vague assertion that [defendant] has ‘transacted business within’ Minnesota,” and nothing suggested that those activities were related to the lawsuit
• “[W]hen the only connection between the defendants and the forum state is the plaintiff himself, they are not enough on their own.”
• “[W]hen the only connection between the defendants and the forum state is the plaintiff himself, they are not enough on their own.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).