Goodyear v. Brown
Holding: Goodyear's foreign subsidiaries were not amenable to suit in North Carolina on claims that were unrelated to any activity by them in that state.
Judgment: Reversed, 9-0, in an opinion by Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg on June 27, 2011.
SCOTUSblog Coverage
- Academic highlight: Symposium on Goodyear and Nicastro (Amanda Frost, June 13, 2012)
- Opinion analysis: No jurisdiction over foreign companies (James Bickford, June 30, 2011)
- The last week of the Term: In Plain English (Lisa Tucker, June 28, 2011)
- Argument recap: Deciding when foreign companies can be haled into U.S. state court (Andy Zahn, January 13, 2011)
- Argument previews: When do state courts have general and specific jurisdiction? (Andy Zahn, January 11, 2011)
- A review of "state secrets" (Lyle Denniston, September 28, 2010)
Briefs and Documents
Merits briefs
- Brief for Petitioner Goodyear Luxembourg Tires, S.A., Goodyear Lastikleri, T.A.S., and Goodyear Dunlop Tires France, S.A.
- Brief for Respondent Edgar Brown and Pamila Brown, Co-Administrators of the Estate of Julian David Brown, and Karen M. Helms, Administratrix of the Estate of Matthew M. Helms.
- Reply Brief for Petitioner Goodyear Luxembourg Tires, S.A., Goodyear Lastikleri, T.A.S., and Goodyear Dunlop Tires France, S.A.
Amicus briefs
Certiorari-stage documents
