If It Wasn't on Purpose, Can a Court Take it Personally?: Untangling Asahi's Mess That J. McIntyre Did Not

Date

2012

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)