J. McIntyre Machinery v. Nicastro
|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
|09-1343||Supreme Court of New Jersey||
Jan 11, 2011
|Jun 27, 2011||6-3||Kennedy||OT 2010|
Holding: A court may not exercise jurisdiction over a defendant that has not purposefully availed itself of doing business in the jurisdiction or placed goods in the stream of commerce in the expectation they would be purchased in the jurisdiction.
Judgment: Reversed, 6-3, in an opinion by Justice Anthony Kennedy on June 27, 2011. Justices Breyer filed an opinion concurring in the judgment, which was joined by Justice Alito. Justice Ginsburg filed a dissenting opinion, which was joined by Justices Sotomayor and Kagan.
- Academic highlight: Symposium on Goodyear and Nicastro
- Opinion analysis: No jurisdiction over foreign companies
- The last week of the Term: In Plain English
- Argument recap: Deciding when foreign companies can be haled into U.S. state court
- Argument previews: When do state courts have general and specific jurisdiction?
- A review of "state secrets"
Briefs and Documents
- Brief for Petitioner J. McIntyre Machinery LTD
- Brief for Respondent Robert Nicastro
- Reply Brief for Petitioner J. McIntyre Machinery LTD
- Brief for the Chamber of Commerce of the United States of America in Support of Petitioner
- Brief for the Product Liability Advisory Council in Support of Petitioner
- Brief for the Organization for International Investment and the Association of International Automobile Manufacturers in Support of Petitioner
- Brief for the American Association for Justice in Support of Respondent
- Brief for the States of Arkansas, Arizona, Hawaii, Illinois, Iowa, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, Missouri, New Mexico, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Tennessee, Utah, & West Virginia in Support of Respondent
- Brief for Public Citizen, Inc., in Support of Respondent
- Brief for the Workers’ Injury Law & Advocacy Group in Support of Respondent
- Brief for Law Professors in Support of Respondent
- Brief for the Dow Chemical Canada ULC in Support of Petitioner