If It Wasn't on Purpose, Can a Court Take it Personally?: Untangling Asahi's Mess That J. McIntyre Did Not
Date
2012
Authors
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Texas Tech Law Review
Abstract
This Comment proposes that purposeful availment accords with the Court's prior personal jurisdiction jurisprudence and, thus, represents the appropriate standard. This conclusion is derived not from a preference in policies but from the thread of horizontal federalism concerns present in the Court's personal jurisdiction jurisprudence from Pennoyer up until Asahi, which purposeful availment respects.
Description
Keywords
Personal jurisdiction analysis, Pennoyer v. Neff, Co-equal sovereignty, World-Wide Volkswagen Corp. v. Woodson, Hanson v. Denckla, Dormant Commerce Clause, Minimum contacts for purposes of personal jurisdiction, International Shoe, Asahi Metal Industry Co. v. Superior Court of California, McIntyre Mach., Ltd. v. Nicastro, Fitting minimum contacts to the internet, Purposeful availment
Citation
Stephen Higdon, If It Wasn't on Purpose, Can a Court Take it Personally?: Untangling Asahi's Mess That J. McIntyre Did Not, 45 Tex. Tech L. Rev. 463 (2012-2013)