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]
On June 27, 2023, Truck on highwaythe Supreme Court of the United States decided Mallory v. Norfolk Southern Railway Co., 600 U.S. 122 (2023). The divided Court upheld a Pennsylvania corporate registration statute which...more
The due process framework that has cabined personal jurisdiction over nationwide and global businesses for the last eight decades — since the U.S. Supreme Court's 1945 ruling in International Shoe Co. v. Washington — looks...more
The identification of where a company is resident is a critical element in accessing the benefits of a double tax treaty. GE Financial Investments Limited (“GEFI Limited”) was a UK incorporated and tax resident company...more
The test for personal jurisdiction, which asks whether a defendant can be compelled to litigate in a particular state, has been extensively developed over the past several decades, and notably refined in the last fifteen...more
The US Supreme Court recently issued a decision in Mallory v. Norfolk Southern Railway Co holding that a Pennsylvania statute requiring corporations to "consent" to suit in Pennsylvania courts in order to register to do...more
On June 27, 2023, the United States Supreme Court held in Mallory v. Norfolk Southern R. Co., No. 21-1168, 2023 WL 4187749, that Norfolk Southern submitted to the state of Pennsylvania’s general jurisdiction (that is, being...more
Late last month the Supreme Court of the United States opened the door to a potential sea change in personal jurisdiction over corporate entities. In Mallory v. Norfolk Southern Railway Company, the Court held that any...more
In its June 27, 2023, Mallory v. Norfolk Southern Railway Co. decision, the U.S. Supreme Court held that a corporate defendant can be sued in Pennsylvania — regardless of whether the cause of action accrues in Pennsylvania or...more
The United States Supreme Court reversed the Pennsylvania Supreme Court’s decision in Mallory v. Norfolk Southern Railway Co., finding Pennsylvania’s consent to jurisdiction by corporate registration unconstitutional in a 5-4...more
A recent (and surprising) ruling of the United States Supreme Court may allow businesses to be sued in states in which they have little connection. The United States Supreme Court, split 5-4 (Gorsuch, Thomas, Alito, Sotomayor...more
Last week, the Supreme Court expanded the scope of personal jurisdiction over corporations in Mallory v. Norfolk Southern Railway Co. In this fragmented 5-4 decision, the Supreme Court held that corporations are subject to...more
In a 5-4 decision, the U.S. Supreme Court has upheld Pennsylvania’s “registration statute,” which requires corporations that register to do business in Pennsylvania to consent to the “general personal jurisdiction” of...more
In Mallory v. Norfolk Southern Railway Co., the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) overturned Pennsylvania’s Supreme Court, holding that a Pennsylvania law comports with the due process clause in requiring...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 Re PT MNC Investama TBK [2020] SGHC 149, the Singapore High Court provided guidance as to what is sufficient for a foreign company to establish standing to avail itself to the Singapore restructuring regime. Specifically,...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
In a September 25 decision, a panel of the Superior Court of Pennsylvania, by a 2-1 majority, found that registering as a foreign corporation in Pennsylvania equals consent to the state court’s general personal jurisdiction....more
A Complaint Identifying Infringing Products and the Patents Allegedly Infringed, Accompanied by Statements that the Products Meet All Elements of at Least One Claim of the Asserted Patents, May be Sufficient to Meet the...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
The European Union General Data Protection Regulation (“GDPR”) is arguably the most comprehensive – and complex – data privacy regulation in the world. As companies prepare for the GDPR to go into force on May 25, 2018, there...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
Another Case on Corporate Tax Residence: Why Does It Matter? - Corporate tax residence is an area of enduring enquiry and focus for HM Revenue & Customs (HMRC) in the UK. Development Securities (No.9) vs. HMRC [2017]...more
On Monday, May 22, the Supreme Court reached a unanimous decision in TC Heartland LLC v. Kraft Foods Group Brands LLC, overruling the Federal Circuit’s interpretation of the patent venue statute, 28 U.S.C. § 1400(b), and...more