The U.S. District Court for the Central District of California recently determined that a foreign company was subject to the jurisdiction of U.S. courts based, in part, on its social media activity.
A recent New York Court of Appeals decision clarified the contours of one of the most foundational legal principles: personal jurisdiction. In Aybar v. Aybar, the Court,.
We recently covered the United States Supreme Court’s troubling decision in
Ford Motor Company v. Montana Eighth Judicial District Court, 141 S. Ct. 1017 (2021), which has broadened the reach of specific personal jurisdiction for many product manufacturers. In an 8–0 decision, the Court held that some companies (like Ford) may be subject to specific jurisdiction in
any U.S. forum where a product-related injury occurs, regardless of whether the defendant’s contacts with the forum were a “but for” cause of the injury. Though the Court attempted to limit its analysis to the “arise out of or relate to” prong of the specific jurisdiction test, the decision’s reach extends uncomfortably beyond that provision. Of particular concern is its impact on another key element of the specific jurisdiction analysis: purposeful availment.
Opinion | The Supreme Court Isn t as Conservative as You Think politico.com - get the latest breaking news, showbiz & celebrity photos, sport news & rumours, viral videos and top stories from politico.com Daily Mail and Mail on Sunday newspapers.