In Search of General Jurisdiction
![handle is hein.journals/tulr64 and id is 1117 raw text is: IN SEARCH OF GENERAL JURISDICTION
B. GLENN GEORGE*
Since the seminal case of International Shoe Co. v. Washing-
tonI restructured the landscape of personal jurisdiction in 1945,
both courts2 and commentators3 have struggled repeatedly with
the task of defining and refining the limits of jurisdictional
power. The vast majority of those efforts have focused on the
problem of specific jurisdiction-when the plaintiff's claim
arises out of the defendant's activities in the forum.4 In contrast,
the exercise of general jurisdiction-when the defendant's
forum activities are unrelated to the cause of action5-has
received limited attention. In the past thirty-five years, the
Supreme Court has addressed directly the general jurisdiction
issue in a single case.6 Attempts by commentators to define the
scope of general jurisdiction have been only slightly more
frequent.7
The reason for such disinterest is apparent. International
Shoe and its progeny diminished the need for the use of general
jurisdiction by substantially expanding the availability of specific
jurisdiction. Thus the courts have had fewer opportunities to
consider the problem. Nonetheless, as illustrated by the
Supreme Court's recent decision in Helicopteros Nacionales de
* Visiting Associate Professor of Law, University of Colorado School of Law. B.A.
1975, University of North Carolina; J.D. 1978, Harvard Law School. I would like to thank
Mary Twitchell, Chris Mueller, Toni Massaro, Hiroshi Motomura, Bill Marshall, and
Gene Nichol for their helpful comments on earlier drafts of this Article.
1. 326 U.S. 310 (1945).
2. See infra subparts I(B) and II(A).
3. See infra notes 7, 12, 96, 172.
4. See Helicopteros Nacionales de Colombia, S.A. v. Hall (Helicol), 466 U.S. 408,414
n.8 (1984); von Mehren & Trautman, Jurisdiction to Adjudicate: A Suggested Analysis, 79
HARV. L. REv. 1121, 1144-64 (1966).
5. See Helicol, 466 U.S. at 414 n.9; von Mehren & Trautman, supra note 4, at 1136-
44.
6. See Helicol, 466 U.S. 408.
7. See Brilmayer, Carolene, Conflicts, and the Fate of the Insider-Outsider, 134 U.
PA. L. REV. 1291, 1319-30 (1986); Brilmayer, Haverkamp, Logan, Lynch, Neuwirth &
O'Brien, A General Look at General Jurisdiction, 66 TEx. L. REv. 723 (1988) [hereinafter
Brilmayer, A General Look]; Hill, Choice of Law and Jurisdiction in the Supreme Court, 81
COLUM. L. REV. 960, 979-86 (1981); Twitchell, The Myth of General Jurisdiction, 101
HARV. L. REV. 610, 667-79 (1988).
8. See infra notes 23-32, 97-136, and accompanying texts.
1097](ViewImageLocal?handle=hein.journals/tulr64&div=42&collection=&method=preview&ext=.png&size=3)
What Is HeinOnline?
Contact us for annual subscription options:
Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?
profiles profiles most
In Search of General Jurisdiction
Contact us for annual subscription options:
Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?
profiles profiles most