Legal Opinion · Dissent

Bandemer v. Ford Motor Co.

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided July 31, 2019No. A17-1182Published

1Dissent

ANDERSON, Justice (dissenting).

The Supreme Court of the United States has been emphatic: "In order for a state court to exercise specific jurisdiction, 'the suit ' must 'aris[e] out of or relat[e] to the defendant's contacts with the forum. ' " Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. Super. Ct. of Cal. , --- U.S. ----, 137 S. Ct. 1773, 1780, 198 L.Ed.2d 395 (2017) (citation omitted).

*756Appellant Adam Bandemer brought this litigation against respondent Ford Motor Company after he was injured while riding as a passenger in a Ford vehicle. But Ford neither designed nor manufactured the car in Minnesota. Nor…

2Cases cited20 opinions

  1. International Shoe Co. v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1945
  2. Burger King Corp. v. RudzewiczSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
  3. World-Wide Volkswagen Corp. v. WoodsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
  4. Helicopteros Nacionales De Colombia, S. A. v. HallSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
  5. Daimler AG v. BaumanSupreme Court of the United States · 2014

15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API