Which case affirmed the 'purposeful availment' approach for personal jurisdiction?

The case that affirmed the 'purposeful availment' approach for personal jurisdiction is recognized as pivotal in shaping how courts assess whether a defendant has sufficient connections to a forum state to warrant being sued there. In the context of personal jurisdiction, 'purposeful availment' refers to the concept that a defendant must have purposely engaged in activities that would lead them to reasonably anticipate being brought into court in the forum state.

In the selected case, the Supreme Court emphasized that establishing personal jurisdiction involves examining the defendant's actions and connections to the forum state. The decision highlighted that if a defendant has 'purposefully availed' themselves of the privilege of conducting activities within the state, leading to that state's laws being invoked, this establishes a sufficient basis for jurisdiction.

This ruling underscored the need for defendants to be able to anticipate being taken to court based on their own deliberate actions rather than the unilateral activity of another party. Therefore, the focus is on the defendant's connections, to ensure fairness in the judicial process.

The other cases listed certainly contribute to the broader context and development of personal jurisdiction law, but they do not specifically address or affirm the concept of 'purposeful availment' in the same foundational way as this ruling.