In DaimlerChrysler AG v. Bauman, a number of justices indicated that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit was wrong when it held that California state courts could assert so-called general personal jurisdiction over the German corporation in litigation by foreign plaintiffs for alleged violations that occurred in a foreign country.
The case has drawn an outpouring of amicus briefs by the business community and conservative legal groups that fear that if jurisdiction exists over Daimler, foreign corporations could be subject to the jurisdiction of American courts based on their alleged conduct anywhere in the world and no matter how old. Human rights and civil rights groups filed briefs supporting the Ninth Circuit decision.
