Ford Motor Co. v. Montana Eighth Judicial District Court
United States Supreme Court
592 U.S. 351 (2021)
- Written by Liz Nakamura, JD
Facts
Automaker Ford Motor Company (Ford) (defendant) was incorporated in Delaware and headquartered in Michigan. Ford sold, marketed, advertised, and serviced new and used Ford vehicles nationwide. Montana resident Markkaya Gullett was killed in a car crash caused by a defect in her Ford Explorer. Minnesota resident Adam Bandemer (plaintiff) suffered injuries caused by a defect in his friend’s Ford Crown Victoria. Gullett’s estate (plaintiff) and Bandemer brought products-liability actions against Ford in Montana and Minnesota respectively. Ford moved to dismiss both suits. It argued that the state courts lacked personal jurisdiction over Ford because the relevant vehicles were not designed, manufactured, or originally sold in the forum states, and consequently, there was no causal connection between the plaintiffs’ claims and Ford’s instate activities. The vehicles were in Montana and Minnesota only because of consumer resales. The state trial courts rejected Ford’s argument, finding that Ford had sufficient connections with their states to support personal jurisdiction. The Montana Supreme Court and Minnesota Supreme Court affirmed, and the United States Supreme Court granted certiorari.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Kagan, J.)
Concurrence (Alito, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 899,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 47,000 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
