Specific Personal Jurisdiction: The Unanswered Questions

By David Holman (July 14, 2017, 12:23 PM EDT) -- Personal jurisdiction fans and the tort bar eagerly awaited the U.S. Supreme Court's decision last month in Bristol-Myers Squibb v. Superior Court of California, 137 S. Ct. 1773.[1]

In Bristol-Myers Squibb, the high court considered whether nonresident plaintiffs allegedly injured by Plavix, a drug manufactured by defendant Bristol-Myers Squibb, could join California residents' mass action lawsuits in California state court, even though the nonresident plaintiffs' claims were unconnected to California. The Supreme Court held that California courts lacked specific personal jurisdiction over nonresident plaintiffs because "all the conduct giving rise to the nonresidents' claims occurred elsewhere."[2]

Despite the intense interest in...

Stay ahead of the curve

In the legal profession, information is the key to success. You have to know what’s happening with clients, competitors, practice areas, and industries. Law360 provides the intelligence you need to remain an expert and beat the competition.


  • Access to case data within articles (numbers, filings, courts, nature of suit, and more.)
  • Access to attached documents such as briefs, petitions, complaints, decisions, motions, etc.
  • Create custom alerts for specific article and case topics and so much more!

TRY LAW360 FREE FOR SEVEN DAYS

Hello! I'm Law360's automated support bot.

How can I help you today?

For example, you can type:
  • I forgot my password
  • I took a free trial but didn't get a verification email
  • How do I sign up for a newsletter?
Ask a question!