World Tanker Carriers Corp. v. MV Ya Mawlaya

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that cases of admiralty arise under federal law for purposes of Rule 4(k)(2)
• holding that cases of admiralty arise under federal law for purposes of Rule 4(k)(2)
• concluding that admiralty cases constitute federal law under Rule 4(k)(2)
• applying, without explanation, the “now familiar [Fourteenth Amendment] minimum contacts analysis” in a Rule 4(k)(2) personal jurisdiction case, without even mentioning the Fifth Amendment once
• applying, without explanation, the “now familiar [Fourteenth Amendment] minimum contacts analysis” in a Rule 4(k)(2) personal jurisdiction case, without even mentioning the Fifth Amendment once
• applying, without explanation, the “now familiar [Fourteenth Amendment] minimum contacts analysis” in a Rule 4(k)(2) personal jurisdiction case, without even mentioning the Fifth Amendment once

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).