No. 19-369

Ford Motor Company v. Adam Bandemer

Lower Court: Minnesota
Docketed: 2019-09-19
Status: Judgment Issued
Type: Paid
Amici (1)Relisted (2) Experienced Counsel
Tags: burger-king causation civil-procedure due-process forum-contacts minimum-contacts personal-jurisdiction relatedness specific-jurisdiction
Key Terms:
DueProcess Privacy
Latest Conference: 2020-01-17 (distributed 2 times)
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Whether the 'arise out of or relate to' requirement is met when none of the defendant's forum contacts caused the plaintiff's claims, such that the plaintiff's claims would be the same even if the defendant had no forum contacts

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

QUESTION PRESENTED The Due Process Clause permits a state court to exercise specific personal jurisdiction over a nonresident defendant only when the plaintiffs claims “arise out of or relate to” the defendant’s forum activities. Burger King Corp. v. Rudzewicz, 471 U.S. 462, 472 (1985) (internal quotation marks omitted). The question presented is: Whether the “arise out of or relate to” requirement is met when none of the defendant’s forum contacts caused the plaintiffs claims, such that the plaintiffs claims would be the same even if the defendant had no forum contacts. (i)

Docket Entries

2021-04-26
JUDGMENT ISSUED.
2021-04-26
MANDATE ISSUED.
2020-03-19
CIRCULATED
2020-03-09
Record received from the U.S.D.C. Todd County District Court of Minnesota. (1-Box)
2020-02-26
The record received from the Supreme Court of Minnesota, the record has been electronically filed.
2020-02-26
Record requested from the Supreme Court of Minnesota.
2020-01-13
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/17/2020.
2019-12-04
Reply of petitioner Ford Motor Company filed.
2019-12-04
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/10/2020.
2019-11-20
Brief of respondent Adam Bandemer in opposition filed.
2019-10-21
Brief amici curiae of The Chamber of Commerce of the United States of America, et al. filed.
2019-10-17
Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including November 20, 2019.
2019-10-17
Motion to extend the time to file a response from October 21, 2019 to November 20, 2019, submitted to The Clerk.
2019-09-26
Blanket Consent filed by Petitioner, Ford Motor Company.
2019-09-18
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due October 21, 2019)

Attorneys

Adam Bandemer
Deepak GuptaGupta Wessler PLLC, Respondent
Deepak GuptaGupta Wessler PLLC, Respondent
Kyle Wayne FarrarKaster, Lynch, Farrar & Ball LLP, Respondent
Kyle Wayne FarrarKaster, Lynch, Farrar & Ball LLP, Respondent
DRI - The Voice Of The Defense Bar
Lisa Marie BairdReed Smith LLP, Amicus
Lisa Marie BairdReed Smith LLP, Amicus
Ford Motor Company
Sean MarottaHogan Lovells US LLP, Petitioner
Sean MarottaHogan Lovells US LLP, Petitioner
Minnesota, Texas, 37 Other States and The District of Columbia
Elizabeth Catherine KramerOffice of the Minnesota Attorney General, Amicus
Elizabeth Catherine KramerOffice of the Minnesota Attorney General, Amicus
Product Liability Advisory Counsel, Inc.
David R. GeigerFoley Hoag LLP, Amicus
David R. GeigerFoley Hoag LLP, Amicus
Professors of Jurisdiction
Vincent Gregory LevyHolwell Shuster & Goldberg, LLP, Amicus
Vincent Gregory LevyHolwell Shuster & Goldberg, LLP, Amicus
The Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers
Jaime Ann SantosGoodwin Procter LLP, Amicus
Jaime Ann SantosGoodwin Procter LLP, Amicus
The Chamber of Commerce of the United States of America, The National Association of Manufacturers, and The American Tort Reform Association
Andrew John PincusMayer Brown LLP, Amicus
Andrew John PincusMayer Brown LLP, Amicus