Document Type

Case Summary

Publication Date


Case Synopsis

The Court determined that (1) “a general jurisdiction inquiry calls for an appraisal of a defendant’s activities in their entirety, nationwide and worldwide”; and (2) “an out-of-state law firm that is solicited by a Nevada client to represent the client on an out-of-state matter does not subject itself to [specific] personal jurisdiction in Nevada simply by virtue of agreeing to represent the client.” Additionally, the Court reaffirmed that “[p]urposeful availment requires that the cause of action arise from the consequences in the forum state of the defendant’s activities.”