Cooper Tire & Rubber Company v. McCall, 312 Ga. 422

Tyrance McCall, a Florida resident, was severely injured in Florida when a Cooper Tire tire allegedly failed; he sued Cooper Tire in Gwinnett County, Georgia for negligence, strict product liability, and punitive damages.
Cooper Tire is incorporated in Delaware with its principal place of business in Ohio; it conceded it was authorized/registered to do business in Georgia and maintained a registered agent.
Cooper Tire moved to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction; the trial court granted the motion; the Court of Appeals reversed, relying on Allstate Ins. Co. v. Klein (holding a foreign corporation authorized to do business in Georgia is a ‘resident’ subject to general jurisdiction).
Georgia Supreme Court granted certiorari to reconsider Klein in light of recent U.S. Supreme Court general-jurisdiction precedents (Goodyear, Daimler, etc.).
The Georgia Supreme Court held Klein does not violate federal due process because Pennsylvania Fire (consent-by-registration) remains binding federal precedent, and declined to overrule Klein under state-law stare decisis (noting practical and statutory consequences of overruling).
The Court nevertheless held Cooper Tire is not subject to specific jurisdiction under Georgia’s Long Arm Statute, but is presently subject to general jurisdiction in Georgia by virtue of Klein; the opinion urges the General Assembly to consider statutory revision.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Georgia may assert general jurisdiction over a foreign corporation solely because it is authorized/registered to do business in Georgia (Klein’s rule)	McCall: Registration makes Cooper Tire a Georgia "resident" per Klein, so Georgia courts have general jurisdiction.	Cooper Tire: Modern U.S. Supreme Court precedents limit general jurisdiction to place of incorporation/principal place of business; Klein conflicts with federal due process.	Court: Klein does not violate federal due process because Pennsylvania Fire (consent-by-registration) remains binding; registration can constitute consent to general jurisdiction.
Whether Klein should be overruled as a matter of Georgia statutory interpretation and stare decisis	McCall: Klein is correct and should stand.	Cooper Tire: Klein misread statutes and creates perverse incentives; should be overruled.	Court: Declines to overrule Klein—stare decisis factors (soundness, workability, reliance, age) favor keeping Klein to avoid a jurisdictional gap.
Whether Cooper Tire is subject to specific jurisdiction under Georgia’s Long Arm Statute (OCGA §§9-10-90 et seq.)	McCall: Authorized-to-do-business status supports jurisdiction.	Cooper Tire: Minimal Georgia contacts and the injury occurred in Florida; no basis for specific jurisdiction.	Court: Cooper Tire is not subject to specific jurisdiction under the Long Arm Statute; but remains subject to general jurisdiction under Klein.

Pennoyer v. Neff, 95 U.S. 714 (1878) (foundational territorial approach to personal jurisdiction)
Pennsylvania Fire Ins. Co. v. Gold Issue Mining & Milling Co., 243 U.S. 93 (1917) (state registration/agent filing can constitute consent to general jurisdiction)
International Shoe Co. v. Washington, 326 U.S. 310 (1945) (minimum-contacts test and distinction between specific and general jurisdiction)
Goodyear Dunlop Tires Operations, S.A. v. Brown, 564 U.S. 915 (2011) (general jurisdiction requires affiliations so continuous and systematic as to render defendant "at home")
Daimler AG v. Bauman, 571 U.S. 117 (2014) (limits general jurisdiction for nonconsenting corporations to place of incorporation or principal place of business in ordinary cases)
Ford Motor Co. v. Montana Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 141 S. Ct. 1017 (2021) (clarifies specific-jurisdiction analysis; distinguishes specific and general jurisdiction)
Allstate Ins. Co. v. Klein, 262 Ga. 599 (1992) (Georgia precedent holding a foreign corporation authorized to transact business in Georgia is a "resident" subject to general jurisdiction)