Drivers (preferably flame retardant) Wanted

Forum shopping is when someone attempts to get their case heard in a particular court. Every state and municipality has its own laws. Every potential jury pool has its own culture. Therefore, depending on the case, some forums may be better than others.

World-Wide Volkswagen Corp. v. Woodson (1980)

Facts
Mr. and Mrs. Robinson were New York residents who bought an Audi from a local dealer. While driving the car through Oklahoma they were involved in a wreck. The couple suffered serious injuries, which they alleged were due to the Audi’s faulty gas tank. The Robinsons filed suit against Volkswagen in Oklahoma, a state that happened to have very plaintiff-friendly juries. Volkswagen argued that Oklahoma did not have jurisdiction.

Question
Was minimum contact established?

Holding
No

Reasoning
One of the key issues with minimum contact is foreseeability. That the Audi might ultimately travel to Oklahoma from New York was reasonably foreseeable. But Audi had no service or sales centers in Oklahoma. Audi did not seek to serve the Oklahoma market by direct or indirect means. It was the plaintiff’s unilateral action that established minimum contact with Oklahoma. If the court defines forseeability in the way the Robinsons desire, forum shopping will quickly get out of hand.

And the winner is…
The Germans, series tied 1-1

Notes
- Is forum shopping ethical? On the one hand, attorneys should absolutely use the system to assist their clients. On the other hand, this feels like it’s violating the spirit of the law.

- Speaking of forum shopping, federal grand juries are noted for their relative objectivity and fairness. Since FGJs are drawn from a much larger pool, they should be more diverse.

– There is a theory that personal jurisdiction rules should be modified. Poor people are disadvantaged because they can’t afford to maintain long-distance lawsuits. Should poor people be allowed to sue locally regardless of minimum contacts?