Supreme Court holds state courts can exercise general personal jurisdiction over registered out-of-state corporations
In Mallory v. Norfolk Southern Railway Co., No. 21–1168 (U.S.), the United States Supreme Court held that state courts can exercise general jurisdiction over out-of-state corporations when a state requires an out-of-state corporation to register to do business in state and, as part of that registration, requires the corporation to accept service of all claims made in the state. While Pennsylvania is currently the only state with this type of jurisdictional statute, that could change following today’s ruling.
Specifically, the question before the Court in Mallory was whether a Pennsylvania court can hear a lawsuit brought against a Virginia-based railroad company by a Virginia man who worked for the railroad in Virginia and Ohio. The Court found that a Pennsylvania court could hear the lawsuit due to a Pennsylvania law that requires an out-of-state business to answer in Pennsylvania any suits against the business in exchange for registering as a foreign corporation. The Court’s decision may have significant implications for whether out-of-state businesses registered in states with similar statutory regimes must defend lawsuits in states entirely unrelated to the claims in the lawsuit.
Contact Scopelitis Attorneys Greg Feary, Adam Smedstad, Chip Andrewscavage, James Eckhart, Tom Schulte, or Andy Marquis for questions about this ruling.
News from Scopelitis is intended as a report to our clients and friends on developments affecting the transportation industry. The published material does not constitute an exhaustive legal study and should not be regarded or relied upon as individual legal advice or opinion.
Supreme Court holds state courts can exercise general personal jurisdiction over registered out-of-state corporations
In Mallory v. Norfolk Southern Railway Co., No. 21–1168 (U.S.), the United States Supreme Court held that state courts can exercise general jurisdiction over out-of-state corporations when a state requires an out-of-state corporation to register to do business in state and, as part of that registration, requires the corporation to accept service of all claims made in the state. While Pennsylvania is currently the only state with this type of jurisdictional statute, that could change following today’s ruling.
Specifically, the question before the Court in Mallory was whether a Pennsylvania court can hear a lawsuit brought against a Virginia-based railroad company by a Virginia man who worked for the railroad in Virginia and Ohio. The Court found that a Pennsylvania court could hear the lawsuit due to a Pennsylvania law that requires an out-of-state business to answer in Pennsylvania any suits against the business in exchange for registering as a foreign corporation. The Court’s decision may have significant implications for whether out-of-state businesses registered in states with similar statutory regimes must defend lawsuits in states entirely unrelated to the claims in the lawsuit.
Contact Scopelitis Attorneys Greg Feary, Adam Smedstad, Chip Andrewscavage, James Eckhart, Tom Schulte, or Andy Marquis for questions about this ruling.
News from Scopelitis is intended as a report to our clients and friends on developments affecting the transportation industry. The published material does not constitute an exhaustive legal study and should not be regarded or relied upon as individual legal advice or opinion.