dc.contributor.author | Sherry, Suzanna | |
dc.date.accessioned | 2016-02-04T17:18:51Z | |
dc.date.available | 2016-02-04T17:18:51Z | |
dc.date.issued | 2013 | |
dc.identifier.citation | 66 Vanderbilt Law Review 197 (2013) | en_US |
dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/1803/7435 | |
dc.description | article published in law review | en_US |
dc.description.abstract | As all the Roundtable essays note, DaimlerChrysler asks the Supreme Court to decide whether and when the in-forum activities of a corporate subsidiary should give rise to general personal jurisdiction over the corporate parent. My four co-contributors provide four wonderfully different perspectives on that question. And what those different perspectives should tell us isas I argued in my original contributionthat it would be a mistake for the Supreme Court to decide that question in this case. | en_US |
dc.format.extent | 1 PDF (6 pages) | en_US |
dc.format.mimetype | application/pdf | |
dc.language.iso | en_US | en_US |
dc.publisher | Vanderbilt Law Review | en_US |
dc.subject.lcsh | Judicial power -- United States | en_US |
dc.subject.lcsh | United States. Supreme Court | en_US |
dc.title | Res Ipsa Loquitur (Or Why the Other Essays Prove My Point) | en_US |
dc.type | Article | en_US |