I. Why It Matters - Until recently, personal jurisdiction over corporate defendants had been expanding significantly in scope through the reliance on tenuous corporate contacts or business conducted by a defendant in a...more
BNSF Railway Co. v. Tyrell redefined the contours of a court’s jurisdictional reach by effectively subjecting corporations to general personal jurisdiction only in those states where they are incorporated or have their...more
As its term drew to a close, the Supreme Court handed down its latest decision on personal jurisdiction in a case entitled Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. Superior Court of Cal., San Francisco Cty. Over the last six years, the...more
In its two recent 8–1 decisions, BNSF Railway Co. v. Tyrrell and Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. Superior Court of California, the U.S. Supreme Court doubled down on its 2014 landmark personal jurisdiction ruling in Daimler AG v....more
Last month, the U.S. Supreme Court held that due process restricts a state court’s power to exercise “general” (i.e. all-purpose) jurisdiction to hear any and all claims against a defendant. General jurisdiction exists only...more
This past Monday, the U.S. Supreme Court drastically changed the landscape of mass tort litigation. In Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. Superior Court of California, the Court found that the State of California did not have...more
In Bristol-Myers Squibb v. Superior Court of California, No. 16-466, slip op. (U.S., June 19, 2017), the United States Supreme Court provided further clarification regarding the exercise of personal jurisdiction over...more
The 2016–2017 U.S. Supreme Court term will be remembered for decisions on splashier subjects, but for the business community, the personal-jurisdiction decisions in BNSF Railway Co. v. Tyrrell and Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v....more
On Monday, June 19, 2017, the Supreme Court clarified the limits of specific personal jurisdiction in state courts, holding that a connection between a defendant’s contacts with the forum and the claims at issue remains...more
The availability of any forum aside from a defendant's state of incorporation or principal place of business will require a plaintiff to carefully consider the likelihood of obtaining specific jurisdiction because there is...more
Almost any business whose products or services reach customers in multiple states knows that there are some jurisdictions thought to be friendlier to plaintiffs. Plaintiffs’ lawyers know about those jurisdictions too, and...more
On May 30, 2017, the U.S. Supreme Court handed down yet another personal jurisdiction opinion emphasizing clear rules as to when out-of-state defendants may be haled into court. While the decision in BNSF Railway Co. v....more
The U.S. Supreme Court in BNSF Railway Co. v. Tyrrell, 2017 WL 2322834 (2017) made it harder for plaintiffs to sue in states where their alleged injury did not occur by reversing the Montana Supreme Court’s attempt to assert...more