Supreme Court Decides Mallory v. Norfolk Southern
For prior TLB coverage of this case, see here. The Supreme Court (finally) issued a decision today in Mallory v. Norfolk Southern, holding that Pennsylvania’s corporate registration statute, which requires out-of-state businesses to consent to all-purpose jurisdiction in Pennsylvania courts, does not violate the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Justice Alito joined Justice Gorsuch’s…
Continue Reading“Tag Service” and Section 1782
[This post originally appeared at Letters Blogatory and is reprinted here with the author’s permission.] Bill Dodge has a really interesting post about a decision from the bench in an SDNY Section 1782 case, In re Fourworld Event Opportunities Fund. Decisions like this are from the darkest corner of the legal dark web. They are not published. They are not available…
Continue ReadingTheir Beef Is with Burger King
The Justices have not yet given us good reasons to give up on International Shoe. Instead, their complaints are really about the doctrinal scaffolding that the Burger and Rehnquist Courts built on top of International Shoe in the 1980s.
Continue ReadingTagging Corporate Directors for Discovery under Section 1782
Section 1782 authorizes federal district courts to order any person who “resides or is found in” the judicial district to provide discovery “for use in a proceeding in a foreign or international tribunal.” The Second Circuit has held that “that § 1782’s ‘resides or is found’ language extends to the limits of personal jurisdiction consistent…
Continue ReadingWaiting for Mallory
The Supreme Court’s recent dormant Commerce Clause decision may shed light on how the Justices are thinking about Mallory v. Norfolk Southern.
Continue ReadingDiscovery and Immunity: LIV v. PGA
The U.S. legal battle between the PGA Tour (Tour) and the upstart rival LIV Golf continues to revolve around discovery. As regular TLB readers know, LIV Golf is a new professional golf tour that competes with the PGA, in part by luring PGA players to play in LIV tournaments. LIV is financed by the Public Investment…
Continue ReadingIf Not Here, Where? Transnational Litigation Against U.S. Tech Companies Around the World
As U.S. courts have narrowed their amenability to transnational litigation, foreign courts have emerged as forums for such litigation. This is strikingly clear in suits against U.S. tech companies, which often cannot be sued at home because of Section 230 immunity. In suits around the world against U.S. tech giants, foreign courts are adapting concepts…
Continue ReadingForum Selection Clauses, Non-Signatories, and Personal Jurisdiction in New York
As a general rule, the law will not vest contractual rights in (or impose contractual obligations upon) individuals who are not parties to an agreement. Over the past few decades, however, the courts have had occasion to relax this rule in the context of forum selection clauses. As previously discussed here and here and at…
Continue ReadingOfficials Who Kidnapped Hotel Rwanda Hero Are Not Immune from Suit
In 1994, Paul Rusesabagina was the manager of a hotel in Kigali, Rwanda. During the genocide, he sheltered 1,268 Hutu and Tutsi refugees, all of whom survived. His courage inspired the film “Hotel Rwanda,” and in 2005 President Bush awarded him the Presidential Medal of Freedom. Rusesabagina became a human rights advocate and vocal critic…
Continue ReadingSupreme Court Ducks Fifth Amendment Due Process Question
The Supreme Court denied certiorari yesterday in Douglass v. Nippon Yusen Kabushiki Kaisha. This highly-watched case raises an important question that the Court will have to address sooner or later: the Fifth Amendment due process limitations on personal jurisdiction. The Supreme Court’s personal jurisdiction cases have repeatedly interpreted the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment…
Continue Reading