BNSF Railway Company v. Tyrrell

Case Updates

The U.S. Supreme Court reversed the Montana Supreme Court’s decision, and reiterated that the Constitution’s Fourteenth Amendment does not permit a state to hale an out-of-state corporation into the state for claims that arise out-of-state.

The U.S. Chamber urged the U.S. Supreme Court to overturn a Montana Supreme Court decision that ignored the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling in Daimler AG v. Bauman. In Daimler, the U.S. Supreme Court held that a forum may not exercise general personal jurisdiction over a defendant corporation unless the defendant is “at home” in the jurisdiction. The Chamber’s brief argued that the Montana Supreme Court erred in exercising general personal jurisdiction over the defendant, because the defendant was not incorporated in Montana, nor was Montana the defendant’s principal place of business. The Chamber also argued that the Montana Supreme Court erroneously held that, under the Federal Employers’ Liability Act (“FELA”), any court that could have venue over a FELA claim automatically may exercise personal jurisdiction over the defendant. The Chamber reasoned that although Congress can provide a court with venue, it cannot allow a court to exercise personal jurisdiction beyond what constitutional due process would allow.

The Montana Chamber of Commerce, National Federation of Independent Business, and American Tort Reform Association joined the Chamber on the brief.

Paul D. Clement, George W. Hicks, Jr., and Edmund G. Lacour, Jr. of Kirkland & Ellis LLP served as counsel for the amici.

The U.S. Chamber filed an amicus brief supporting review of a Montana Supreme Court decision that ignores the U.S. Supreme Court’s rules on the issue of general personal jurisdiction. Ignoring the ruling in Daimler AG v. Bauman, the Montana Court permitted general personal jurisdiction to be exercised over the defendant even though it was not incorporated in Montana and did not maintain its principal place of business there. In addition, the court erroneously commingled fundamental concepts of personal jurisdiction with venue, holding that the generous venue provision in the Federal Employers’ Liability Act (“FELA”) also subjected the defendant to the general personal jurisdiction of the Montana courts.

The Chamber’s brief urged the Court to take the case and re-confirm the supremacy of its personal jurisdiction rulings. Further, the brief explains that, beyond its blatant disregard for the U.S. Supreme Court’s holdings, the Montana Supreme Court’s decision resurrects the unfairness and uncertainty in the personal jurisdiction context that the U.S. Supreme Court has gradually sought to eliminate. Finally, the Chamber urged the Court to grant certiorari to deter state courts from continuing to disregard U.S. Supreme Court decisions they do not agree with, in violation of the Supremacy Clause.

The Chamber was joined on the brief by the Montana Chamber of Commerce, the National Federation of Independent Business, and the American Tort Reform Association.

Paul D. Clement, George W. Hicks, Jr., and Edmund G. LaCour, Jr. of Kirkland & Ellis LLP served as counsel for the U.S. Chamber of Commerce on behalf of the U.S. Chamber Litigation Center.