Ninth Circuit Holds That 'Tag Jurisdiction' Does Not Apply To Corporations

Stosh Silivos is an Associate in our New York office.

The Court's Decision Limits Personal Jurisdiction Against Corporate Defendants

HIGHLIGHTS:

Consistent with Daimler, the Ninth Circuit holds that in-state service of process on a corporation's officer does not render the corporation "at home" in the state to create jurisdiction over the corporation. While a corporation's officers may "in some abstract sense be 'present' wherever its officers do business, such presence is not physical in the way contemplated" for tag jurisdiction. Following closely on the heels of the U.S. Supreme Court's landmark personal jurisdiction decision in Daimler AG v. Bauman,1 the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit has issued a decision that further reinforces the limited circumstances in which general jurisdiction may be invoked against a corporate defendant. (See the Holland & Knight Aviation alert, " Daimler and Walden The Supreme Court's Continued Trend on Limiting Personal Jurisdiction," March 20, 2014.) In Martinez v. Aero Caribbean,2 the appellate court held that in-state service of process on a corporation's officer is not sufficient to create general personal jurisdiction over the corporation.

Plaintiffs Attempt to Serve Corporate Officer While in California

In Martinez, the French aircraft manufacturer Avions de Transport Régional (ATR) was sued in federal...