Consolidated Case: 19-368 FORD MOTOR CO. V. MONTANA EIGHTH DISTRICT COURT and 19-369 FORD MOTOR CO. V. BANDEMER (2020-Oct-7)
19-368 FORD MOTOR CO. V. MONTANA EIGHTH DISTRICT COURT
DECISION BELOW: 443 P.3d 407 LOWER COURT CASE NUMBER: OP 19-0099
QUESTION PRESENTED:
The Due Process Clause permits a state court to exercise specific personal jurisdiction over a non-resident defendant only when the plaintiff’s claims“arise out of or relate to" the defendant's forum activities.Burger King Corp. v. Rudzewicz, 471 U.S. 462, 472 (1985) (internal quotation marks omitted).
The question presented is:
1. Whether the“arise out of or relate to" requirement is met when none of the defendant's forum contacts caused the plaintiff’s claims, such that the plaintiff’s claims would be the same even if the defendant had no forum contacts.
19-369 FORD MOTOR CO. V. BANDEMER
DECISION BELOW: 931 N.W.2d 744 LOWER COURT CASE NUMBER: A17-1182
QUESTION PRESENTED:
The Due Process Clause permits a state court to exercise specific personal jurisdiction over a non-resident defendant only when the plaintiff’s claims“arise out of or relate to" the defendant's forum activities.Burger King Corp. v. Rudzewicz, 471 U.S. 462, 472 (1985) (internal quotation marks omitted).
The question presented is:
1. Whether the“arise out of or relate to" requirement is met when none of the defendant's forum contacts caused the plaintiff’s claims, such that the plaintiff’s claims would be the same even if the defendant had no forum contacts.
SUPPORT what we are doing here by contributing to our Patreon at https://www.patreon.com/supremecourt
19-368 FORD MOTOR CO. V. MONTANA EIGHTH DISTRICT COURT
DECISION BELOW: 443 P.3d 407 LOWER COURT CASE NUMBER: OP 19-0099
QUESTION PRESENTED:
The Due Process Clause permits a state court to exercise specific personal jurisdiction over a non-resident defendant only when the plaintiff’s claims“arise out of or relate to" the defendant's forum activities.Burger King Corp. v. Rudzewicz, 471 U.S. 462, 472 (1985) (internal quotation marks omitted).
The question presented is:
1. Whether the“arise out of or relate to" requirement is met when none of the defendant's forum contacts caused the plaintiff’s claims, such that the plaintiff’s claims would be the same even if the defendant had no forum contacts.
19-369 FORD MOTOR CO. V. BANDEMER
DECISION BELOW: 931 N.W.2d 744 LOWER COURT CASE NUMBER: A17-1182
QUESTION PRESENTED:
The Due Process Clause permits a state court to exercise specific personal jurisdiction over a non-resident defendant only when the plaintiff’s claims“arise out of or relate to" the defendant's forum activities.Burger King Corp. v. Rudzewicz, 471 U.S. 462, 472 (1985) (internal quotation marks omitted).
The question presented is:
1. Whether the“arise out of or relate to" requirement is met when none of the defendant's forum contacts caused the plaintiff’s claims, such that the plaintiff’s claims would be the same even if the defendant had no forum contacts.
SUPPORT what we are doing here by contributing to our Patreon at https://www.patreon.com/supremecourt
★ Support this podcast on Patreon ★
DECISION BELOW: 443 P.3d 407 LOWER COURT CASE NUMBER: OP 19-0099
QUESTION PRESENTED:
The Due Process Clause permits a state court to exercise specific personal jurisdiction over a non-resident defendant only when the plaintiff’s claims“arise out of or relate to" the defendant's forum activities.Burger King Corp. v. Rudzewicz, 471 U.S. 462, 472 (1985) (internal quotation marks omitted).
The question presented is:
1. Whether the“arise out of or relate to" requirement is met when none of the defendant's forum contacts caused the plaintiff’s claims, such that the plaintiff’s claims would be the same even if the defendant had no forum contacts.
19-369 FORD MOTOR CO. V. BANDEMER
DECISION BELOW: 931 N.W.2d 744 LOWER COURT CASE NUMBER: A17-1182
QUESTION PRESENTED:
The Due Process Clause permits a state court to exercise specific personal jurisdiction over a non-resident defendant only when the plaintiff’s claims“arise out of or relate to" the defendant's forum activities.Burger King Corp. v. Rudzewicz, 471 U.S. 462, 472 (1985) (internal quotation marks omitted).
The question presented is:
1. Whether the“arise out of or relate to" requirement is met when none of the defendant's forum contacts caused the plaintiff’s claims, such that the plaintiff’s claims would be the same even if the defendant had no forum contacts.
SUPPORT what we are doing here by contributing to our Patreon at https://www.patreon.com/supremecourt
