Where is a corporation’s principal place of business, and why does it matter? Trial lawyers know:
For a corporation, the U.S. Supreme Court’s axiom may soon be: Home is where the headquarters is.
The Court heard oral arguments Tuesday in Hertz Corp. v. Friend, which raises a seemingly simple but vexing question crucial for corporations: For purposes of diversity jurisdiction, where is a company’s principal place of business?
The answer will be crucial in determining whether a corporation can be sued in federal court, as it might prefer, or in plaintiff-friendly state courts. Acting in a class action by Hertz employees over wages and hours filed in California, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals determined that, even though its headquarters is in New Jersey, Hertz is a citizen of California because more business activities occur there than in any other state. With both sides deemed to be from California, there was no federal diversity jurisdiction, so the case went to state court. Hertz appealed to the high court.
Source: Law.com – Justices Sympathetic to Applying Headquarters Standard to Corporate Jurisdiction
Not that my opinion matters, but I agree that where the HQ is makes a great test.
Where is a corporation’s principal place of business, and why does it matter? Trial lawyers know:
For a corporation, the U.S. Supreme Court’s axiom may soon be: Home is where the headquarters is.
The Court heard oral arguments Tuesday in Hertz Corp. v. Friend, which raises a seemingly simple but vexing question crucial for corporations: For purposes of diversity jurisdiction, where is a company’s principal place of business?
The answer will be crucial in determining whether a corporation can be sued in federal court, as it might prefer, or in plaintiff-friendly state courts. Acting in a class action by Hertz employees over wages and hours filed in California, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals determined that, even though its headquarters is in New Jersey, Hertz is a citizen of California because more business activities occur there than in any other state. With both sides deemed to be from California, there was no federal diversity jurisdiction, so the case went to state court. Hertz appealed to the high court.
Source: Law.com – Justices Sympathetic to Applying Headquarters Standard to Corporate Jurisdiction
Not that my opinion matters, but I agree that where the HQ is makes a great test.
Where is a corporation’s principal place of business, and why does it matter? Trial lawyers know:
For a corporation, the U.S. Supreme Court’s axiom may soon be: Home is where the headquarters is.
The Court heard oral arguments Tuesday in Hertz Corp. v. Friend, which raises a seemingly simple but vexing question crucial for corporations: For purposes of diversity jurisdiction, where is a company’s principal place of business?
The answer will be crucial in determining whether a corporation can be sued in federal court, as it might prefer, or in plaintiff-friendly state courts. Acting in a class action by Hertz employees over wages and hours filed in California, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals determined that, even though its headquarters is in New Jersey, Hertz is a citizen of California because more business activities occur there than in any other state. With both sides deemed to be from California, there was no federal diversity jurisdiction, so the case went to state court. Hertz appealed to the high court.
Source: Law.com – Justices Sympathetic to Applying Headquarters Standard to Corporate Jurisdiction
Not that my opinion matters, but I agree that where the HQ is makes a great test.
Join the conversation!