GOODYEAR DUNLOP TIRES OPERATIONS, S.A. v. BROWN Case Brief
Complete case briefs with LSD+
Every LSD.Law brief pairs a full IRAC analysis with opinion summaries at three levels of depth, written by a team of Harvard Law and MIT graduates - a quick synopsis when you are pressed for time, the complete reasoning when you need to go deep.
Adaptive Case Views
Toggle between Flash, Standard, and Expanded. Get what you need, when you need it.
Exam-Ready IRAC Format
We deliver the precise structure professors look for in exam answers.
Complex Cases, Clarified
We break down dense legal reasoning into something digestible, helping you grasp core concepts.
Case Brief Summary & Legal Analysis
tl;dr: Foreign subsidiaries of a U.S. company were sued in North Carolina for a bus accident in France. The Supreme Court held that North Carolina lacked jurisdiction because the subsidiaries’ limited, indirect sales in the state did not make them “at home” there for unrelated claims.
Legal Significance: This case clarifies the standard for general personal jurisdiction, holding that a corporation is only “at home”—and thus subject to suit on any claim—in its state of incorporation, principal place of business, or in an exceptional case where its affiliations are functionally equivalent.
GOODYEAR DUNLOP TIRES OPERATIONS, S.A. v. BROWN Law School Study Guide
Use this case brief structure for your own legal analysis. Focus on the IRAC methodology to excel in law school exams and cold calls.
Case Facts & Court Holding
Key Facts & Case Background
Two North Carolina teenagers died in a bus accident in France. Their parents filed a wrongful-death suit in North Carolina state court, alleging the accident was caused by a defective tire. The defendants included The Goodyear Tire and Rubber Company (Goodyear USA), an Ohio corporation, and three of its foreign subsidiaries located in Turkey, France, and Luxembourg. The tire in question was manufactured by the Turkish subsidiary. Goodyear USA, which had substantial operations in North Carolina, conceded to jurisdiction. The foreign subsidiaries, however, moved to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction. The subsidiaries were not registered to do business in North Carolina, had no offices or employees there, and did not directly solicit business or sell tires in the state. However, a small percentage of their tires, different from the type involved in the accident, reached North Carolina through a distribution network managed by other Goodyear affiliates. The North Carolina Court of Appeals found that this placement of products into the “stream of commerce” was sufficient to establish general personal jurisdiction over the foreign subsidiaries.
Court Holding & Legal Precedent
Issue: Does a state court’s exercise of general personal jurisdiction over foreign subsidiary corporations comply with due process when the corporations’ only connection to the forum is the indirect sale of a small number of their products within the state, and the cause of action is unrelated to those sales?
No. The foreign subsidiaries’ attenuated connections to North Carolina were insufficient to Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, s
IRAC Legal Analysis
About IRAC analysis
IRAC (Issue, Rule, Analysis, Conclusion) is the structure professors expect in exam answers. Each LSD.Law brief states the issue, the governing rule with citations, the court's application of that rule, and the conclusion - the same reasoning pattern you will use on exams and in practice.
Legal Issue
Does a state court’s exercise of general personal jurisdiction over foreign subsidiary corporations comply with due process when the corporations’ only connection to the forum is the indirect sale of a small number of their products within the state, and the cause of action is unrelated to those sales?
Conclusion
This decision significantly reinforced the high bar for establishing general personal jurisdiction, Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exer
Legal Rule
For a court to exercise general personal jurisdiction over a corporate defendant, Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa
Legal Analysis
The Supreme Court, in a unanimous opinion by Justice Ginsburg, reversed the Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna al
Flash-to-Full Case Opinions
Flash Summary
- A foreign corporation is not subject to a state’s general jurisdiction