Post Daimler AG v. Bauman Decisions

Recent Court Rulings Applying Bauman Create a Path for Defendants to Win Dismissal Based on a Lack of Personal Jurisdiction

Nationwide, courts are applying the United States Supreme Court's ruling in Daimler AG v. Bauman and granting defendants' motions to dismiss based on a lack of personal jurisdiction. Here are a few noteworthy examples.

On September 30, 2016, in Bauer v. Nortek Global HVAC LLC, the Middle District of Tennessee granted the defendants' motion to dismiss, holding that the Court lacked personal jurisdiction over the defendants.¹ Applying Bauman, the Court held that it lacked general jurisdiction over the defendants because they were not essentially at home in Tennessee. Defendants were neither incorporated nor headquartered in the state.² The Court also held that one of the defendant's in-state facilities did not meet the "continuous and systematic contacts" test, finding that, under Bauman, a defendants' "mere presence" in the forum state is