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
Last November, I questioned whether Mallory v. Norfolk Southern Railway Co., U.S. S. Ct. Case No. No. 21-1168 will wipe out Delaware's hegemony over corporate litigation. In a recent post, Professor Josh Blackman considers...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
Executive Summary: The Sixth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals (the federal appeals court with jurisdiction over Kentucky, Michigan, Ohio, and Tennessee) recently held that Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) lawsuits filed on behalf...more
In two decisions issued on the same day, the Sixth and Eighth Circuits recently joined many district courts across the country in holding that federal courts cannot exercise jurisdiction over Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA)...more
Seyfarth Synopsis: In the wake of the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. Superior Court of California, 137 S. Ct. 1773, 1780 (2017), numerous district courts across the country have ruled that they...more
I. Why It Matters - Until recently, personal jurisdiction over corporate defendants had been expanding significantly in scope through the reliance on tenuous corporate contacts or business conducted by a defendant in a...more
In Kyowa Seni, Co., Ltd. v. ANA Aircraft Technics, Co., Ltd., Docket No. 650589/2017, 2018 WL 3321410 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. July 5, 2018), Justice Saliann Scarpulla of the New York County Commercial Division joined in a long line of...more
A defendant in a talc jury trial intends on appealing a recent verdict reached in a Missouri case involving twenty-two plaintiffs who claimed that the defendant’s talcum powder contained asbestos and that they developed...more
Following the Supreme Court’s landmark personal-jurisdiction decision in Bristol-Myers Squibb, federal district courts have continued to disagree about whether to apply the court’s holding to cases involving nationwide class...more
It’s been one year since the TC Heartland decision was issued by the Supreme Court, and it’s had a big impact on patent litigation. See TC Heartland LLC v. Kraft Food Brands LLC, 137 S. Ct. 1514, 1521 (May 22, 2017)....more
In our continuing coverage of the post-TC Heartland landscape, the Federal Circuit recently clarified that venue is proper in only one district per state in In re BigCommerce, Inc., 2018-122 (Fed. Cir. May 15, 2018) (slip...more
The Federal Circuit today in In re HTC Corp., Misc. 2018-130 (May 5, 2018), followed the holding of the Supreme Court in Brunette Machine Works, Ltd. v. Kockum Industries, Inc., 406 U.S. 706 (1972), that venue is proper as to...more
On June 19, 2017, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a decision that has the potential to reshape the way class actions are litigated in courts throughout the country. In Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. Superior Court of California,...more
For decades, it was well-established that defendants in patent cases could be sued almost anywhere they were subject to the court’s personal jurisdiction. ...more
BNSF Railway Co. v. Tyrell redefined the contours of a court’s jurisdictional reach by effectively subjecting corporations to general personal jurisdiction only in those states where they are incorporated or have their...more
The ramifications of the Supreme Court’s decision in Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. Superior Court of California, San Francisco Cty., 137 S. Ct. 1773 (2017), remain unsettled. ...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 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
Earlier this month, Judge Leinenweber of the Northern District of Illinois rejected a named plaintiff’s attempt to bring a nationwide class action, basing his decision on the Supreme Court’s decision last June in...more