Re-Examining New York's Law of Personal Jurisdiction after Goodyear Dunlop Tires Operations, S.A. V. Brown and J. McIntyre Machinery, Ltd. V. Nicastro

By Chase, Oscar G.; Day, Lori Brooke | Albany Law Review, Winter 2012 | Go to article overview

Re-Examining New York's Law of Personal Jurisdiction after Goodyear Dunlop Tires Operations, S.A. V. Brown and J. McIntyre Machinery, Ltd. V. Nicastro


Chase, Oscar G., Day, Lori Brooke, Albany Law Review


INTRODUCTION I. BACKGROUND II. GENERAL JURISDICTION       A. The Supreme Court Cases: Goodyear, Helicopteros, and           Perkins       B. General Jurisdiction in New York III. SPECIFIC JURISDICTION       A. The Supreme Court: Specific Jurisdiction and Due           Process           1. Basic Doctrine           2. The Stream-of-Commerce Cases: Nicastro and               Asahi       B. Specific Jurisdiction in New York           1. 302(a)(1): "[T]ransacts any business within the              state or contracts anywhere to supply goods or              services in the state"           2. 302(a)(2): "[C]ommits a tortious act within the               state"           3. 302(a)(3)(i): "[C]ommits a tortious act without the               state causing injury to person or property within               the state ... if he ... regularly does or solicits               business, or engages in any other persistent course               of conduct, or derives substantial revenue from               goods used or consumed or services rendered, in               the state"           4. 302(a)(3)(ii): "[C]ommits a tortious act without the               state causing injury to person or property within               the state, ... if he ... expects or should reasonably               expect the act to have consequences in the state               and derives substantial revenue from interstate or               international commerce"           5. 302(a)(4): "[O]wns, uses or possesses any real               property situated within the state" CONCLUSION 

INTRODUCTION

On June 27, 2011, the Supreme Court announced two decisions striking down state court rulings because they violated the constitutional limits governing the exercise of jurisdiction over foreign entities: Goodyear Dunlop Tires Operations, S.A. v. Brown, (1) in which the Court held that North Carolina had contravened the rules cabining "general" jurisdiction, (2) and J. McIntyre Machinery, Ltd. v. Nicastro, (3) in which the same fate befell New Jersey's attempt to rely on "specific" jurisdiction. (4) The two cases are significant not only because they reversed the state courts but also because over twenty years had passed since the Court had last decided a personal jurisdiction case, (5) leaving contemporary state courts to interpret an increasingly obsolete doctrine when dealing with relevant constitutional challenges. In the context of the present article, we address the important question: How do--or should--these cases affect New York's jurisdiction jurisprudence? In this article, we first describe the background cases that have informed the development of contemporary doctrines of personal jurisdiction. Second, we discuss the impact of Goodyear, pointing out that a reasonable reading of the case would require some restriction of New York's general jurisdiction over corporations. Third, we read the tea leaves left in the brew of the three different opinions--none of which commanded a majority--in Nicastro. We close with a conclusion and some observations.

While we believe that each of the cases will require some change in the law of personal jurisdiction of New York, the judicial response to them depends upon not only the case being applied--Goodyear or Nicastro--but also on the New York court to which the issue is presented. When faced with arguably conflicting rulings, the supreme courts and the appellate divisions should err on the side of following Court of Appeals precedent as opposed to that of the Supreme Court of the United States. This is because those courts are bound by the decisions of the Court of Appeals as well as by those of the United States Supreme Court and therefore must be extremely cautious in, as it were, "overruling" the Court of Appeals upon the authority of the Supreme Court unless the latter is crystal clear. The Court of Appeals has more freedom to adjust its own jurisprudence in the light of Supreme Court rulings and should not shrink from overruling its own precedents if doing so arguably would comport better with either of the cases discussed.

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Sign up now for a free, 1-day trial and receive full access to:

  • Questia's entire collection
  • Automatic bibliography creation
  • More helpful research tools like notes, citations, and highlights
  • Ad-free environment

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
One moment ...
Project items

Items saved from this article

This article has been saved
Highlights (0)
Some of your highlights are legacy items.

Highlights saved before July 30, 2012 will not be displayed on their respective source pages.

You can easily re-create the highlights by opening the book page or article, selecting the text, and clicking “Highlight.”

Citations (0)
Some of your citations are legacy items.

Any citation created before July 30, 2012 will labeled as a “Cited page.” New citations will be saved as cited passages, pages or articles.

We also added the ability to view new citations from your projects or the book or article where you created them.

Notes (0)
Bookmarks (0)

You have no saved items from this article

Project items include:
  • Saved book/article
  • Highlights
  • Quotes/citations
  • Notes
  • Bookmarks
Notes
Cite this article

Cited article

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

(Einhorn, 1992, p. 25)

(Einhorn 25)

1

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited article

Re-Examining New York's Law of Personal Jurisdiction after Goodyear Dunlop Tires Operations, S.A. V. Brown and J. McIntyre Machinery, Ltd. V. Nicastro
Settings

Settings

Typeface
Text size Smaller Larger
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

Full screen

matching results for page

Cited passage

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn, 1992, p. 25).

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn 25)

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences."1

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited passage

Welcome to the new Questia Reader

The Questia Reader has been updated to provide you with an even better online reading experience.  It is now 100% Responsive, which means you can read our books and articles on any sized device you wish.  All of your favorite tools like notes, highlights, and citations are still here, but the way you select text has been updated to be easier to use, especially on touchscreen devices.  Here's how:

1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
2. Click or tap the last word you want to select.

OK, got it!

Thanks for trying Questia!

Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

For full access in an ad-free environment, sign up now for a FREE, 1-day trial.

Already a member? Log in now.