Ronar, Inc. v. Wallace

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that $6,500 in interstate commerce, even if it constituted 20% of defendant’s total revenue was not substantial
• holding that there was no personal jurisdiction under CPLR § 302(a)(3)(ii) over an individual earning $6,500 from international commerce because he should not be “called upon to bear the expense and inconvenience of litigating in a distant forum”
• finding conclusory allegations that an out-of-state father exercised control over his in-state son’s actions insufficient for agency jurisdiction
• refusing to grant stay where “the claims, though partially dependent on certain common factual issues, are ultimately distinct.”
• denying stay and rejecting arguments of inconvenience and different West German discovery laws
• removing case to seek stay, unsuccessfully, regarding parallel West German action

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).