Personal Jurisdiction Part 2: The Ford Cases [More With McGlinchey Ep. 8]
Personal Jurisdiction: Not what you learned in law school [More with McGlinchey Ep. 4]
In a recent decision, Mallory v. Norfolk Southern Railway Co., the U.S. Supreme Court opened the door for companies to face lawsuits in the state where they have registered to do business. The ruling stems from a case...more
On June 27, 2023, the Supreme Court of the United States held 5-4 that a Pennsylvania statute requiring an out-of-state company to submit to general personal jurisdiction within the Commonwealth when registering to do...more
On June 27, 2023 the United States Supreme Court issued its opinion in Mallory v. Norfolk Southern Railway Co., No. 21-1168 (2023) vacating the Pennsylvania Supreme Court’s decision, which held that it was a violation of the...more
The US Supreme Court has held that companies can be forced, as a condition of doing business in a state, to agree to be sued in that state’s courts — even if the lawsuit has nothing to do with that state. In its June 27,...more
Let’s say that your company is incorporated in Michigan, headquartered in Michigan, and does business there and in a dozen other states. One of your customers in Texas claims the products it purchased from you and that you...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
A recent Pennsylvania Supreme Court decision, Mallory v. Norfolk Southern Railroad Co., presents the U.S. Supreme Court with an opportunity to reexamine its 2014 landmark ruling in Daimler. On April 25, 2022, the U.S. Supreme...more
Since the U.S. Supreme Court's 2014 landmark decision in Daimler AG v. Bauman, courts around the country have been reexamining their prior holdings addressing whether a company consents to personal jurisdiction solely by...more
The common train of thought when litigating as an out-of-state defendant is that it is best to be venued in federal court so as to eliminate any advantage an in-state plaintiff might have with a local jury. Typically, foreign...more
In a ruling handed down this week, U.S. District Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill addressed whether California law applied to derivative claims apparently brought on behalf of an Oregon entity. I found Judge O'Neill's ruling...more
Until I happened upon a working paper by Professors Martin Gelter and Lécia Vicente, I had not encountered the notion of abusing a corporation merely by choosing where to incorporate it. The authors describe abuse as...more
A new regulation came into effect on 1 August 2019 to align certain disclosure obligations of non-Hong Kong companies to those of local companies. These obligations mainly surround the display of company names and place of...more
In a decision that should have a ripple effect in Pennsylvania state and federal courts, the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania held in a June 6, 2019, opinion that “the Pennsylvania statutory scheme...more
"Whereof what's past is prologue, what to come" Youngevity Int'l v. Smith, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 31526 involved cross motions to dismiss a claim for breach of fiduciary duty. The plaintiff, a Delaware corporation, argued...more
In 2017, the Supreme Court rejected the Federal Circuit’s longstanding interpretation of Personal Jurisdiction and Venue in patent infringement actions against domestic companies. 28 U.S.C. §§ 1391, 1400; see TC Heartland LLC...more
In May 2017, the U.S. Supreme Court in TC Heartland v. Kraft Foods reversed more than 25 years of Federal Circuit precedent when it held that for venue purposes a corporation is resident only in its state of incorporation. In...more
My guess is that most attorneys would say that the duty of an officer to the corporation are governed by the law of the state of incorporation under the “internal affairs doctrine”. As explained by the U.S. Supreme Court,...more
Recently, I gave a brief presentation concerning various provisions of the California General Corporation Law that could apply to corporations incorporated outside of California. I emphasized that the CGCL defines the terms...more
A recent decision in the Delaware Supreme Court, in conjunction with the broad California exceptions to the internal affairs doctrine, may dictate the legal landscape of shareholder litigation in California in the near...more
Greb v. Diamond International Corp., __ Cal.4th __, __ Cal. Rptr.4th __ (February 21, 2013) In a victory for liability insurers against the asbestos plaintiffs’ bar, the California Supreme Court ruled in Greb v. Diamond...more