Eastman v. Hillard

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that foreign corporation’s registration in Montana did not equate to consent to general personal jurisdiction
• explaining that the Montana registration statute “explicitly tells corporations that they are not subject to personal jurisdiction in Montana based solely on their appointment of a registered agent” and lists similar statutes adopted in ten other states
• “Reading our registration statutes to confer general personal jurisdiction over foreign corporations would swallow the Supreme Court’s due process limitations on the exercise of general personal jurisdiction[.]”
• listing States with statutes that do not permit the prac- tice
• analyzing virtually indistinguishable Montana statutes stating that “[n]othing puts a corporation on notice that, by appointing a registered agent to receive service of process in Montana, it is consenting to general personal jurisdiction in Montana.”
• listing States with statutes that do not permit the prac- tice

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).