When served with a summons and complaint for an out-of-state lawsuit, one of the first things a defendant is likely to ask is—can this court compel me to appear? Given that most transportation and logistics-related disputes...more
The Supreme Court has significantly expanded the possible grounds for personal jurisdiction against corporations, upholding Pennsylvania’s statute requiring foreign businesses registered in the Commonwealth to consent to...more
In Mallory v. Norfolk Southern Railway Co., Robert Mallory (a Virginia resident) sued his former employer, Norfolk Southern (a Virginia-based railroad), over his alleged exposure to toxic chemicals while working for Norfolk...more
The Supreme Court held that a corporation can be subject to personal jurisdiction in a state in which it has registered to do business—solely on that basis, and regardless of the extent of its operations in that state. ...more
Plaintiffs’ counsel rejoice, defense counsel take note, and businesses beware. Daimler has been diminished and businesses are no longer only subject to general jurisdiction in states in which they are incorporated or...more
A Virginia resident sued a Virginia company headquartered in Virginia over events that occurred in Virginia. And he filed his lawsuit in…… Pennsylvania. The Court heard argument earlier this week in Mallory v. Norfolk...more
In its upcoming October 2022 Term, the US Supreme Court is set to take up a challenge to how states are permitted to exercise jurisdiction over corporations. Mallory v. Norfolk Southern Railway Co., No. 21-1168, offers the...more
The Supreme Court is scheduled to hear argument on November 8 in Mallory v. Norfolk Southern Railway Co., 21-1168, and it appears ready to resolve a longstanding issue that has divided lower courts. That issue is whether it...more
It would not be surprising to find Mallory v. Norfolk Southern Railway Co. become mandatory class material across law schools in the future. The case presents a thought-provoking discussion of specific and general...more
On May 11, 2021, Judge Kevin McNulty of the District of New Jersey issued an order applying the Supreme Court’s recent personal jurisdiction decision in Ford Motor Co. v. Montana Eighth Judicial District Court, 141 S. Ct....more
In affirming the dismissal of a lawsuit against Pillsbury’s client, AirAsia, the D.C. Circuit overruled its prior precedent that a company’s website could be sufficient to support general jurisdiction. A company’s internet...more
Recently, the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to hear a manufacturer’s challenge to two state supreme court decisions (Minnesota and Montana) that allowed plaintiffs to bring product defect suits in states where the manufacturer...more
With certain jurisdictions within Pennsylvania being considered highly favorable to plaintiffs, claimants and their counsel often go to great lengths to have suit brought in Pennsylvania. Any long-time litigation...more
For the past several years the United States Supreme Court has sought to clarify the proper exercise of specific personal jurisdiction over foreign corporate defendants. This issue is particularly applicable in mass tort...more
With its recent opinion in BNSF Railway Co. v. Tyrrell, the United States Supreme Court reaffirmed the strong position that it took in Daimler AG v. Bauman with respect to general jurisdiction, leaving no doubt that a...more
For the second time in the last three years, the U.S. Supreme Court has addressed the constitutional limits of a court’s ability to exercise jurisdiction over a defendant. The 14th Amendment limits the personal jurisdiction...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
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
Product manufacturers routinely hauled into court in far away, inconvenient jurisdictions can breathe a little easier with the Supreme Court’s decision this week in Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. Superior Court of California. ...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
Following on the heels of BNSF Railway Company v. Tyrrell last month, the Supreme Court, by an 8-1 margin in Bristol-Myers Squibb v. Superior Court of California, has reaffirmed the jurisdictional holding of its 2014 Daimler...more
On May 30, 2017, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in favor of corporations in a personal jurisdiction decision, limiting the number of places where they can be sued. In BNSF Railway Co. v. Tyrrell, an 8-1 decision authored by...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 Supreme Court decided BNSF Railway Co. v. Tyrrell, No. 16-405, holding that § 56 of the Federal Employers’ Liability Act (FELA) does not address personal jurisdiction and thus limiting the fora in which a...more