Earticle

초록

영어

In June 2011, the U.S. Supreme Court made two decisions regarding the issue of whether state courts may assert jurisdiction over foreign corporations of product liability suits. These two decisions are worth reviewing since its Asahi decision in 1987, the Court deeply discussed the court-created jurisdictional theories including the minimum contact standard and the stream-of-commerce theory. The Court in Goodyear Dunlop Tires Operations, S.A. v. Brown denied jurisdiction of the North Carolina courts over three foreign subsidiaries of Goodyear in Luxembourg, Turkey, and France for the accident occurred in France. The Court found that the activities of foreign subsidiaries were single, occasional or unorganized activities, and are not enough to render themselves to the forum's jurisdiction. The Court in J. McIntyre Machinery v. Nicastro also did not approve the jurisdiction of the New Jersey courts over an English manufacturer although the injury caused by its machine occurred in the forum state. The Court strictly interpreted the stream-of-commerce test, by noting that mere placement of the foreign company’s product is not enough to assert jurisdiction over it unless other conducts, such as advertising, direct selling or marketing in the forum, are accompanied. Taking the chance to introduce the recent decisions of the U.S. Supreme Court regarding personal jurisdiction, the paper also looks over various jurisdictional theories over personal jurisdiction.

목차

I. Introduction
 II. Overview of Personal Jurisdiction in the United States
 III. Analysis of Jurisdiction over Foreign Corporations in Goodyear and McIntyre in 2011
 IV. Conclusion
 References
 국문초록
 ABSTRACT

키워드

저자

• 최영란 [ Choi, Young-Ran | Associate Professor, School of Law, Wonkwang University, researcher of Legal Research Institute. ]

참고문헌

발행기관

간행물

표지보기 관심저널 등록

• 간행물명

  원광법학 [Journal of Law research]

• 간기

  계간

• pISSN

  1598-429X

• eISSN

  2508-4526

• 수록기간

  1962~2026

• 등재여부

  KCI 등재

• 십진분류

  KDC 360 DDC 340