Personal Jurisdiction After Bristol-Myers Squibb: Unresolved Issues, Shifting Plaintiff Strategies

Recording of a 90-minute CLE webinar with Q&A


Conducted on Wednesday, September 26, 2018

Recorded event now available

or call 1-800-926-7926
Program Materials

This CLE webinar will discuss the issue of personal jurisdiction over corporate defendants in the wake of the Supreme Court’s 2017 Bristol-Myers Squibb v. Superior Ct. and BNSF Railway Co. v. Tyrrell rulings. The program will review the progression of the Court’s prior decisions on corporate jurisdiction, lower court decisions issued since the BMS/BNSF rulings, and key unresolved legal issues in the year following the BMS decision.

Description

The Supreme Court’s 2017 Bristol-Myers Squibb ruling continued the Court’s trend toward a constrictive view of corporate specific jurisdiction, starting with its 2011 Goodyear Dunlop Tires Operations v. Brown decision and the 2014 Daimler AG v. Bauman ruling.

The Court’s ruling in BMS followed its 2017 decision in BNSF Railway Co. v. Tyrrell, which held that the Court’s general jurisdiction decision in Daimler is based on the Fourteenth Amendment and is not limited to certain types of claims.

The BMS decision limited jurisdiction to those states where the defendant is incorporated or has its principal place of business. Despite the apparent impact of the BMS ruling, several unanswered questions remain, and circuit splits have begun to develop.

Listen as our panel of litigators analyzes personal jurisdiction over corporate defendants after the Supreme Court’s Bristol-Myers Squibb and BNSF Railway Co. rulings. The program will discuss prior rulings by the Supreme Court on corporate jurisdiction, as well as decisions issued since the BMS/BNSF rulings. The panel will review unresolved issues and discuss expected plaintiff litigation tactics.

READ MORE

Outline

  1. Prelude to Bristol-Myers Squibb and BNSF Railway Co.
    1. Goodyear Dunlop Tires Operations v. Brown (2011)
    2. Daimler AG v. Bauman (2014)
  2. Bristol-Myers Squibb v. Superior Ct. and BNSF Railway Co. v. Tyrrell
  3. Decisions applying Bristol-Myers and BNSF and unresolved legal issues
  4. Evolving plaintiff tactics

Benefits

The panel will review these and other noteworthy issues:

  • What are the implications of Bristol-Myers Squibb v. Superior Court for litigation proceeding in states where the defendant is not subject to general jurisdiction?
  • Does the Fifth Amendment similarly restrict personal jurisdiction by a federal court that the Fourteenth Amendment imposes on state courts?
  • How have plaintiffs adjusted their litigation strategies in response to prior Supreme Court cases restricting corporate personal jurisdiction and what unresolved questions remain post-Bristol-Myers Squibb?

Faculty

Ackerman, Wystan
Wystan M. Ackerman

Partner
Robinson & Cole

Mr. Ackerman chairs the firm's Class Action Team and has a national class action defense practice. He has been...  |  Read More

Agneshwar, Anand
Anand Agneshwar

Partner
Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer

Mr. Agneshwar is Co-Chair of the firm's Product Liability Litigation practice group. He represents pharmaceutical...  |  Read More

Ruttinger, Michael
Michael J. Ruttinger

Counsel
Tucker Ellis

Mr. Ruttinger develops and implements strategies for clients in class action, commercial and complex litigation across...  |  Read More

Other Formats
— Anytime, Anywhere

Strafford will process CLE credit for one person on each recording. All formats include program handouts. To find out which recorded format will provide the best CLE option, select your state:

CLE On-Demand Video

$197

Download

$197