Bauman v. DaimlerChrysler Corp.
676 F.3d 774
9th Cir.2011Background
- Plaintiffs, 22 Argentinian residents, allege MBA aided state security in kidnapping, torture, detention, and murder during Argentina's Dirty War.
- DCAG moved to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction; the district court tentatively granted, then denied, etc., on that basis.
- MBUSA, a DCAG subsidiary, has extensive operations in California and is identified as DCAG's agent for purposes of jurisdiction.
- The General Distributor Agreement between DCAG and MBUSA gives DCAG near-total control over MBUSA's operations, network, pricing, and standards.
- Plaintiffs rely on MBUSA's California presence and DCAG's right to control MBUSA to impute DCAG's contacts to California.
- The Ninth Circuit reverses, holding MBUSA was DCAG's general agent for purposes of California jurisdiction and that jurisdiction is reasonable.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether MBUSA is DCAG's agent for general jurisdiction | MBUSA's extensive California contacts reflect agency. | Agency is not proven; contacts do not establish DCAG's general jurisdiction. | MBUSA is DCAG's agent for general jurisdiction. |
| Whether exercise of general jurisdiction comports with due process | DCAG's US market presence, MBUSA integration, and US revenue render jurisdiction reasonable. | Germany/Argentina as alternative forums and burden on DCAG negate reasonableness. | Jurisdiction comports with due process; reasonable under the seven-factor test. |
| Whether Argentina or Germany provide an adequate alternative forum | Argentina is not fully adequate due to statute of limitations; Germany questionable due to tolling/exhaustion. | Argentina or Germany could be alternative forums; if adequate, weigh factors against California. | Argentina not clearly adequate; Germany uncertain; factors favor plaintiffs overall. |
Key Cases Cited
- Wells Fargo & Co. v. Wells Fargo Exp. Co., 556 F.2d 406 (9th Cir. 1977) (agency theory for personal jurisdiction; substantial agency relationships count)
- Chan v. Society Expeditions, Inc., 39 F.3d 1398 (9th Cir. 1994) (agency test; services sufficiently important to parent's interests)
- Harris Rutsky & Co. Ins. Servs., Inc. v. Bell & Clements Ltd., 328 F.3d 1122 (9th Cir. 2003) (importance and control considerations in agency/long-arm analysis)
- Wiwa v. Royal Dutch Petroleum Co., 226 F.3d 88 (2d Cir. 2000) (forum availability and human rights considerations in international suits)
- Sarei v. Rio Tinto, PLC, 550 F.3d 822 (9th Cir. 2008) (exhaustion and adequacy of alternative forums in TVPA/ATS context)
- Panavision Int'l v. Toeppen, 141 F.3d 1316 (9th Cir. 1998) (forum convenience/efficient resolution considerations in jurisdictional analysis)
- Core-Vent Corp. v. Nobel Indus. AB, 11 F.3d 1482 (9th Cir. 1993) (multifactor reasonableness in jurisdictional analysis; forum-related interests)