Mallory v. Norfolk Southern Railway Co.

Robert Mallory worked for Norfolk Southern Railway in Virginia, where he was exposed to carcinogens and later developed cancer. After moving to Pennsylvania, he sued the Virginia-based company in Pennsylvania state court under a Pennsylvania law that treats out-of-state corporations as consenting to general personal jurisdiction simply by registering to do business there. Norfolk Southern argued that Pennsylvania lacked jurisdiction because the company's connections to the state were insufficient. The Pennsylvania Supreme Court agreed, finding that the registration statute violated due process. The U.S. Supreme Court reversed in a 5-4 decision on June 27, 2023, holding that requiring corporate consent to general jurisdiction as a condition of conducting business does not offend the Due Process Clause. The ruling allowed the lawsuit to proceed in Pennsylvania.

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled 5-4 to uphold the Pennsylvania statute, holding that consent by registration jurisdiction is constitutional. Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote the majority opinion. The case was remanded for further proceedings.

Whether a Pennsylvania statute requiring out-of-state corporations to consent to general personal jurisdiction by registering to do business violates the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

The decision expanded plaintiffs' ability to forum shop by reviving registration-based general jurisdiction. It may prompt more states to enforce or adopt similar consent statutes, raising compliance concerns for multistate corporations and potentially altering business registration strategies. The ruling also invited criticism that it undermines the Supreme Court's prior narrowing of general jurisdiction in Daimler and Bristol-Myers Squibb.