|
gptkbp:instanceOf
|
gptkb:United_States_Supreme_Court_case
|
|
gptkbp:arguedDate
|
2013-10-15
|
|
gptkbp:citation
|
571 U.S. 117
|
|
gptkbp:concurringOpinionBy
|
gptkb:Sonia_Sotomayor
|
|
gptkbp:country
|
gptkb:United_States
|
|
gptkbp:date
|
2014-01-14
|
|
gptkbp:decidedBy
|
gptkb:Supreme_Court_of_the_United_States
|
|
gptkbp:decision
|
opinion of the Court
|
|
gptkbp:docketNumber
|
11-965
|
|
gptkbp:fullName
|
Daimler AG, Petitioner v. Barbara Bauman et al.
|
|
gptkbp:heldBy
|
A court in the United States may not exercise general jurisdiction over a foreign corporation solely because an indirect corporate subsidiary performs services on its behalf in the forum state.
|
|
https://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#label
|
Daimler AG v. Bauman
|
|
gptkbp:legalSubject
|
gptkb:Alien_Tort_Statute
general jurisdiction
personal jurisdiction
|
|
gptkbp:majorityOpinionBy
|
gptkb:Ruth_Bader_Ginsburg
|
|
gptkbp:petitioner
|
gptkb:Daimler_AG
|
|
gptkbp:relatedTo
|
gptkb:International_Shoe_Co._v._Washington
Goodyear Dunlop Tires Operations, S. A. v. Brown
|
|
gptkbp:response
|
Barbara Bauman, et al.
|
|
gptkbp:unanimousDecision
|
true
|
|
gptkbp:bfsParent
|
gptkb:International_Shoe_Co._v._Washington
|
|
gptkbp:bfsLayer
|
7
|