On September 2, NAM filed an amicus brief urging the U.S. Supreme Court to affirm the Pennsylvania Supreme Court’s decision in Mallory v. Norfolk Southern Railway Company, which held that Pennsylvania statutes that condition the privilege of doing business in the State on an out-of-state corporation’s submission to general personal jurisdiction is inconsistent with the Fourteenth Amendment. Mallory is a lawsuit filed by a Virginia resident against Norfolk Southern Railway—a Virginia-based corporation—in the Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas. The plaintiff alleges that exposure to harmful chemicals while employed by Norfolk Southern in Ohio entitled him to relief under the Federal Employer’s Liability Act. This case raises significant concerns regarding states’ ability to subject manufacturers to the jurisdiction of state courts that have little or no connection to a lawsuit, potentially subjecting manufacturers to greater liability then in their home state—generally their state of incorporation and principal place of business.
The trial court dismissed the case for lack of personal jurisdiction and the Pennsylvania Supreme Court affirmed. Our amicus brief urges the U.S. Supreme Court to likewise affirm. First, as a practical matter, ambiguous state statutes requiring registration to do or transact business have led to manufacturers registering in all states in which they have employees or operations—but registration alone is not indicative of a manufacturer’s consent to suit or sufficient to protect manufacturer’s liberty interests under the Due Process Clause. Further, the Supreme Court has explained that the Due Process Clause prescribes the circumstances under which a state can assert general jurisdiction over a manufacturer and focuses on a manufacturer’s “continuous and systematic” conduct in a forum state, not simply its registration with the state to do business. Finally, permitting states to expand general personal jurisdiction by statute would encourage forum shopping to plaintiff-friendly jurisdictions, which in turn would unnecessarily burden courts and juries with claims in which they have no meaningful stake.
Unfortunately, on June 27, 2023, the U.S. Supreme Court reversed the Pennsylvania Supreme Court's decision.