Document Type




This Note argues for the increased exercise of general jurisdiction based on registration statutes. Carefully drafted state statutes, explicitly stating that corporations registering to do business in a state thereby consent to general jurisdiction, not only solve the consequences of Daimler, but also fully comport with traditional values of fairness.

Part I outlines the jurisprudential history related to general jurisdiction. Section A begins with the concept of territoriality introduced in Pennoyer and the minimum contacts analysis in International Shoe, then discusses the modern doctrine in Perkins, Helicopteros, and Goodyear, culminating with Daimler. Section B outlines the jurisprudence of consent-based jurisdiction before Daimler. Next, Part II addresses the consequences of Daimler and how lower courts have interpreted and implemented the decision. Finally, Part III discusses statutory solutions. Section A summarizes legislation pending in New York that would codify consent-based jurisdiction. Section B addresses the criticisms of consent to jurisdiction based on registration statutes. Finally, Section C suggests improvements to legislation to ensure corporate accountability.



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.