Supreme Court--Division of min contacts

Supreme Court--Division of min contacts - T 1 H E S U P R E...

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
T H E S U P R E M E C O U R T T h e   d i v i s i o n   o f   t h e   c o u r t s   o n   m i n i m a l   c o n t a c t s   f r o m  A s a h i      a n d   W W V W 1 Asahi O’Connor (joined by Rehnquist, Powell, Scalia) No minimum contacts can be found here because N did not intentionally or purposefully market its product in the forum state . Also, exercise of personal jurisdiction over N is unreasonable ( Justice Scalia offers no opinion on the reasonableness test ) Brennan (joined by White, Marshall, Blackmun) Minimum contacts exist because was aware that its product was regularly sold in the forum state. Also, jurisdiction was unreasonable. Stevens (joined by White, Blackmun) Minimum contacts exist because purposefully marketed its product and was aware of the sale of its product in the forum state . Also, jurisdiction was unreasonable. World Wide Volkswagen
Background image of page 1
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

This note was uploaded on 06/15/2009 for the course LAW 577 taught by Professor Staff during the Spring '08 term at University of Arizona- Tucson.

Ask a homework question - tutors are online