Jessica Hylton


Many of us can likely recall the uncomfortable feeling of a shoe that just does not fit. Whether too big or too small, it no longer offers the protection it was designed to provide and risks only pain and injury. Either way, it is time for a new shoe. Personal jurisdiction has its own shoe. In the groundbreaking case of International Shoe Co. v. Washington, the Supreme Court of the United States set out the necessary principles for a court to exercise personal jurisdiction over a defendant. These principles have endured for nearly 100 years. However, recent expansions on personal jurisdiction doctrine have led some in the legal community to question if the International Shoe principles no longer fit the needs of plaintiffs injured by national and global corporations, or if the principles have been expanded to the point they are unrecognizable. International Shoe dealt specifically with specific jurisdiction, a type of personal jurisdiction pertaining to out-of-state corporate defendants.

Included in

Law Commons



To view the content in your browser, please download Adobe Reader or, alternately,
you may Download the file to your hard drive.

NOTE: The latest versions of Adobe Reader do not support viewing PDF files within Firefox on Mac OS and if you are using a modern (Intel) Mac, there is no official plugin for viewing PDF files within the browser window.