Legal Opinion
Magill v. Ford Motor Co.
Supreme Court of Colorado
Decided September 12, 2016No. Supreme Court Case 15SA332PublishedCited by 19 opinions
1Opinion of the Court 1
Rule Made Absolute
2Opinion of the Court · RiceChief Justice Rice
1 We issued a rule to show cause in this case to review the trial court's conclusion that defendant Ford Motor Company ("Ford") is subject to general personal jurisdiction in Colorado, despite the U.S. Supreme Court's recent decision in Daimler A.G. v. Bauman, — U.S. —, 134 S.Ct. 746, 187 L.Ed.2d 624 (2014). We conclude that the record does not support a finding that Ford is "essentially at home" in Colorado, and therefore, Ford is not subject to general personal jurisdiction here,. Because the trial court did not determine whether Ford was subject to specific jurisdiction,…
3Cases cited27 opinions
- International Shoe Co. v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1945
- World-Wide Volkswagen Corp. v. WoodsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
- Daimler AG v. BaumanSupreme Court of the United States · 2014
- Goodyear Dunlop Tires Operations, S. A. v. BrownSupreme Court of the United States · 2011
- Milliken v. MeyerSupreme Court of the United States · 1941
22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
4Cited by19 opinions
- Griffith v. SSC Pueblo Belmont Operating Co.Supreme Court of Colorado · 2016
- Dutch Run-Mays Draft, LLC v. Wolf Block, LLPNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 2017
- Forest City Stapleton Inc. v. RogersSupreme Court of Colorado · 2017
- Rome v. ReyesColorado Court of Appeals · 2017
- Align Corp. Ltd. v. Allister Mark BoustredSupreme Court of Colorado · 2017
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.