Bar Exam Toolbox Podcast Episode 169: Listen and Learn -- Personal Jurisdiction (Civ Pro)
Personal Jurisdiction Part 3 – Oral Arguments in the Ford Cases [More with McGlinchey Ep. 12]
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 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
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
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
Executive Summary: The Sixth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals (the federal appeals court with jurisdiction over Kentucky, Michigan, Ohio, and Tennessee) recently held that Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) lawsuits filed on behalf...more
In two decisions issued on the same day, the Sixth and Eighth Circuits recently joined many district courts across the country in holding that federal courts cannot exercise jurisdiction over Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA)...more
Companies facing mass tort and product liability claims ranging from asbestos to pharmaceuticals have undoubtedly been monitoring developments related to personal jurisdiction in the wake of the U.S. Supreme Court’s landmark...more
Following the Supreme Court’s landmark personal-jurisdiction decision in Bristol-Myers Squibb, federal district courts have continued to disagree about whether to apply the court’s holding to cases involving nationwide class...more
On June 19, 2017, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a decision that has the potential to reshape the way class actions are litigated in courts throughout the country. In Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. Superior Court of California,...more
In June 2017, we wrote about the Supreme Court’s decision in Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. Superior Court, 137 S. Ct. 1773 (2017) and how it would likely affect attempts by plaintiffs to pursue multi-state or nationwide class...more
The Supreme Court’s decision last summer in Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. Superior Court of California, 137 S. Ct. 1773 (2017), is my pick for “2017 Class Action Practitioners’ Case of the Year”––and it’s not even a class case....more
The venue of a lawsuit can be a crucial, even dispositive, decision in managing the strategy of a successful outcome in an IP dispute. Defending a lawsuit on your home turf is often easier than in a distant state – defendants...more
In the recent decision, Bristol-Myers Squibb Company (BMS) v. Superior Court (2017) ___ US ____, the Supreme Court followed a string of recent decisions by further limiting out of state plaintiffs’ access to courts in...more
A recent Supreme Court decision may allow defendants to avoid lawsuits in distant courts that have little or no connection to the lawsuit, especially in cases (such as mass actions) where the claims of out-of-state plaintiffs...more
The Supreme Court of the United States recently reaffirmed the principle that there must be a direct connection between a forum state and the underlying controversy in order for a court to exercise specific jurisdiction over...more
Several weeks ago, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its opinion in Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. Superior Court of Cal., No. 16-466, 581 U.S. —, 2017 WL 2621322 (June 19, 2017) (“Bristol-Myers Squibb”). The more than 600...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
Seyfarth Synopsis: In Bristol-Myers Squibb Company v. Superior Court of California, et al., No. 16-466 (U.S. June 19, 2017), the U.S. Supreme Court articulated the narrow circumstances under which specific jurisdiction will...more
Nation’s highest court reverses California Supreme Court decision that extended the jurisdictional reach of state courts. In the 2016 case Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. Superior Court (Anderson), the California Supreme Court...more
In a decisive 8-1 vote, the U.S. Supreme Court rejected a theory of specific jurisdiction that would allow a state court to assert specific jurisdiction over the claims of out-of-state plaintiffs whose claims were not...more
The U.S. Supreme Court recently tightened the reins when it comes to state courts’ exercise of case-based, specific personal jurisdiction over out-of-state companies. In Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. Superior Court of...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
On June 19, 2017, the Supreme Court reinforced its narrow application of specific jurisdiction in mass tort proceedings in an 8-1 decision in Bristol-Myers Squibb Company v. Superior Court of California. In the class action...more
The U.S. Supreme Court reversed a closely-watched California Supreme Court ruling on Monday, finding that California state courts did not have specific jurisdiction to hear the claims of nonresident plaintiffs in a class...more