Insights

U.S. Supreme Court Clarifies its Specific Jurisdiction Test

April 28, 2021

On March 25 the U.S. Supreme Court held in Ford Motor Co. v. Montana Eighth Judicial Court, 141 S. Ct. 1017 (2021), that a “but-for” causal link between the defendant’s forum activities and the plaintiff’s injuries is not required for a court to exercise specific jurisdiction over the defendant.  The majority opinion examines the language of the Court’s test for specific jurisdiction and explains:

[O]ur most common formulation of the rule demands that the suit “arise out of or relate to the defendant’s contacts with the forum.” Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. Superior Court of Cal., San Francisco Cty., 137 S. Ct. 1773, 1780 (2017) (quoting Daimler, 571 U.S. at 127, 134 S. Ct. 746; emphasis added; alterations omitted)….The first half of that standard asks about causation; but the back half, after the “or,” contemplates that some relationships will support jurisdiction without a causal showing. 
 
141 S. Ct. at 1026-27.  This decision issued in the context of product liability/personal injury claims, but has broader application.