The justices of the U.S. Supreme Court have agreed to decide whether a court can exercise personal jurisdiction over a defendant whose sole “contact” with the forum state is his knowledge that the plaintiff has connections there.

2012AP1426 In the matter of the refusal of Brandon H. Bentdahl

2012AP875, 2012AP876 City of Milwaukee v. Hall

12-2236 Ruppel v. CBS Corp.

2010AP3097 In re the marriage of: Weber v. Handeland

10-3509 Albert Trostel & Sons Co. v. Notz

11-1955 Copeland v. Penske Logistics, LLC

2011AP308 State ex rel. Porter v. Cockroft, et al.

10-3465 & 10-3466 In re Ortiz

11-2172 In re IFC Credit Corp.

2010AP2086 State v. Klettke

2010AP2794 Semlar, et al. v. Kallembach

Civil Procedure Appeals; jurisdiction

Civil Procedure Court of Federal Claims; jurisdiction Two suits are for or in respect to the same claim, precluding CFC jurisdiction, if they are based on substantially the same operative facts, regardless of the relief sought in each suit. Since 1868, Congress has restricted the jurisdiction of the CFC and its predecessors when related actions are pending else-where. Keene Corp. ...

Civil Procedure Small claims; jurisdiction This is an appeal of two small claims judgments. Both were awarded to Kristine Panenka for reimbursement of money given to her sister, Kimberly Panenka. Kimberly appeals both judgments. She contends that because they add up to more than $5000, they exceed the jurisdictional limit for small claims. She also argues that the trial court ...

Civil Procedure Jurisdiction; preemption; Class III medical device; dismissal with prejudice In a diversity action where plaintiff alleges injury by a hip replacement, a Class III medical device under the federal Food Drug and Cosmetic Act, under Illinois common law for negligence and strict liability for a defective product, the trial court erred when it held that her common-law claims ...

Civil Procedure Appeals; jurisdiction Admiral Insurance Company and Chubb Custom Insurance Company appeal a judgment dismissing their claims against their insured, Paper Converting Machine Company. We initially decided the appeal on the merits, including the following language in a footnote: Admiral and Chubb purport to appeal from a judgment entered July 8, 2009 that, “[b]ased on the court’s Decision of ...