Schwartz v. Frankenhoff

How courts have described this case

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

• observing that the U.S. Supreme Court’s “decisions strongly suggest” that “conspiracy participation is not enough” to “meet due process requirements for personal jurisdiction”
• observing that “[n]o court will accept conclusory allegations of a conspiracy, without more, as sufficient to establish personal jurisdiction over an alleged member of the conspiracy”
• letters and telephone calls to the forum state are insufficient by themselves to create jurisdiction
• “In addition to marketing under the 76 brand, the company will continue to market products under the Shell brand.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).