Daimler AG v. Bauman
|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
Oct 15, 2013
|Jan 14, 2014||9-0||Ginsburg||OT 2013|
Disclosure: Goldstein & Russell, P.C., whose attorneys work for or contribute to this blog in various capacities, is among the counsel to the respondents in this case.
Holding: Daimler cannot be sued in California for injuries allegedly caused by conduct of its Argentinian subsidiary when that conduct took place entirely outside of the United States.
Plain English Summary:
Judgment: Reversed, 9-0, in an opinion by Justice Ginsburg on January 14, 2014. Justice Sotomayor filed an opinion concurring in the judgment.
- Opinion recap: A stricter view of general jurisdiction (William Baude)
- Argument recap: Trying to salvage a lost cause (Lyle Denniston)
- Academic highlight: Vanderbilt Law Review roundtable on DaimlerChrysler AG v. Bauman (Amanda Frost)
- Argument preview: The reach of U.S. courts (Lyle Denniston)
- New case on foreign corporations (FINAL UPDATE) (Lyle Denniston)
- Petition of the day (Matthew Bush)