Personal Jurisdiction Part 2: The Ford Cases [More With McGlinchey Ep. 8]
This week, the Court considers when a contractual relationship can establish a defendant’s purposeful availment of a forum state and addresses an equal protection challenge to a shelter-in-place order. ...more
There are few rights more important to civil defendants—particularly corporate entities—than personal jurisdiction, which restricts “‘judicial power not as a matter of sovereignty, but as a matter of individual liberty,’”...more
On June 3, 2022, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals held that an Arizona district court erred in dismissing a defamation suit for lack of personal jurisdiction. The suit was brought by an attorney against three Catholic...more
On June 6, 2022, the Supreme Court of the United States declined to hear petitions seeking review of whether federal courts may exercise personal jurisdiction over claims of nonresident plaintiffs who join Fair Labor...more
Last week, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit applied the Supreme Court’s recent Ford Motor decision on personal jurisdiction to a Rule 12(b)(2) motion to dismiss a TCPA claim. In Hood v. American Auto Care,...more
On August 17, 2021, the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals became the first federal appellate court to expressly rule on the application of the Supreme Court of the United States’ decision in Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. Superior...more
Under current United States Supreme Court precedent, for a court to exercise personal jurisdiction over a manufacturer like Ford, the plaintiff must demonstrate that the court has either general or specific jurisdiction....more
For many, Commerce Clause nexus protections seem to be getting porous. In this week's show, Matt Hunsaker reviews Robinson v. Jeopardy Productions Inc. (Louisiana) and reminds taxpayers of the importance of paying attention...more
In the second installment of our “More with McGlinchey” series on personal jurisdiction, Rasch Brown, Gary Hebert, and Brian LeCompte (New Orleans) discuss the potentially groundbreaking Ford cases pending before the U.S....more
In its recent decision in Enka v Chubb [2020] EWCA Civ 574,1 the Court of Appeal strongly endorsed the English courts' power to grant anti-suit injunctions restraining foreign proceedings brought in breach of an arbitration...more
In Texas Brine Co., L.L.C. v. American Arbitration Association, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit recently addressed a question of first impression involving an interesting twist on removal...more
In a closely-watched case, Salzberg v. Sciabacucchi, No. 346, 2019 (Del. Mar. 18, 2020), the Delaware Supreme Court upheld the facial validity of charter provisions requiring that stockholders bring claims arising under the...more
Addressing the issue of personal jurisdiction in a trademark infringement case, the US Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit reversed the district court and concluded that the plaintiff had made a prima facie showing that...more
Addressing whether the activities of non-exclusive licensees subject the licensor to personal jurisdiction, the US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit held that jurisdiction over the licensees does not extend personal...more
In a nationwide class action lawsuit alleging deceptive trade practices for advertising of a product, a lower court had certified a class and uniformly applied only the forum state’s law to all class members’ claims. Part of...more
On June 21, 2019, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its opinion in North Carolina Department of Revenue v. Kimberly Rice Kaestner 1992 Family Trust. This unanimous decision stated that the State of North Carolina may not tax...more
On June 21, 2019, the U.S. Supreme Court issued an opinion limiting the ability of a state to impose income taxes on a trust when the trust’s connection with the taxing state is minimal. The case is styled North Carolina...more
In North Carolina Department of Revenue v. Kimberley Rice Kaestner 1992 Family Trust, Case No. 18-457, 588 U.S. __ (2019), the Supreme Court revived the two-prong test from Quill v. North Dakota, 504 U.S. 298 (1992) and held...more
On July 2, 2019, the North Carolina Department of Revenue issued a notice setting December 21, 2019, as the deadline for certain taxpayers to file amended returns or tax refund claims based on the U.S. Supreme Court decision...more
Kaestner ruled that a state's taxation of a trust's income, where the only connection to the state was an in-state beneficiary, violates the Due Process Clause. On June 21, 2019, the United States Supreme Court unanimously...more
Supreme Court Ruling in North Carolina Department of Revenue v. Kimberley Rice Kaestner 1992 Family Trust, 588 U.S. [TBD] and its Relevance to Income Taxation of Accumulated Income in California Trusts - The Supreme Court...more
On June 21, 2019, the United States Supreme Court decided North Carolina Dept. of Revenue v. Kimberly Rice Kaestner 1992 Family Trust (hereinafter, “Kaestner”). In a unanimous opinion delivered by Justice Sotomayor, the Court...more
Oftentimes, a family business will be owned in part or entirely by one or more irrevocable trusts. Whether those trusts are subject to state income tax depends on the location of any one or more of: (1) the...more
Last week, the US Supreme Court ruled that North Carolina may not tax a trust’s income when the trust’s only contact with the state is the in-state residence of discretionary beneficiaries. The Due Process Clause requires a...more
There’s big news in the tax and trusts and estates world. The U.S. Supreme Court released its opinion in the North Carolina Dept. of Revenue v. Kimberley Rice Kaestner 1992 Family Trust case...more