Consumer Finance Monitor Podcast Episode: Universal Injunctions, Associational Standing, and Forum Shopping - Their Effects on Legal Challenges to Regulations
The Ninth Circuit’s decision in Harrington v. Cracker Barrel underscores the growing importance of personal jurisdiction in limiting the scope of FLSA collective actions. The court held that employees with no connection to...more
Clients frequently ask whether a business entity needs to register to do business in a particular state with which the entity has begun to have some degree of ongoing contact. In responding we typically consider the state's...more
The decision risks opening the door to increased forum shopping in states with consent-by-registration systems, but significant questions remain about the extent of those risks....more
Mallory v. Norfolk Southern Railway Co., docket number 21-1168 originating from the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, has far-reaching implications which could impinge on the booming forum-shopping industry. Any defendant who...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
Over the past several years, many federal courts have weighed in on whether a key Supreme Court decision requires them to dismiss non-resident opt-in plaintiffs in federal wage and hour collective actions, and there is now...more
Current U.S. bankruptcy law gives companies wide discretion to file a bankruptcy in the venue of their choice. A company can file for bankruptcy in any federal district where it has its “domicile, residence, principal place...more
The first months of the Supreme Court’s 2020 term have had an aura of fatigue: a nation gripped by the COVID-19 pandemic, a court adjusting to a new colleague and an unusually light caseload (to be argued by telephone)....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
On November 8, 2017, the U.S. District Court for the District of New Hampshire joined the ranks of the federal courts that have held that a website itself is a place of public accommodation—even if the business that maintains...more
As its term drew to a close, the Supreme Court handed down its latest decision on personal jurisdiction in a case entitled Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. Superior Court of Cal., San Francisco Cty. Over the last six years, the...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, the United States Supreme reaffirmed some basic principles of personal jurisdiction in Bristol-Meyers Squibb Co. v. Superior Court of California, 528 U.S. __ (2017). In a bloody-good 8-1 decision (with only...more
On June 19th, the Supreme Court issued a decision that could have important consequences for multi-state class actions. In Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. Superior Court, the Court addressed the question whether a California...more
Product manufacturers routinely hauled into court in far away, inconvenient jurisdictions can breathe a little easier with the Supreme Court’s decision this week in Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. Superior Court of California. ...more
On Monday, the U.S. Supreme Court placed new limits on where lawsuits may be filed. In Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. Superior Court of California, No. 16–466 (June 19, 2017), the justices, in an eight – one decision,...more
On June 19, 2017, in Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. Superior Court of California, the Supreme Court held, by a vote of 8 to 1, that California courts lack specific jurisdiction to entertain a nonresident’s claims that are...more
In Bristol-Myers Squibb v. Superior Court of California, No. 16-466, slip op. (U.S., June 19, 2017), the United States Supreme Court provided further clarification regarding the exercise of personal jurisdiction over...more