Goodyear Dunlop Tires Case Study

Goodyear Dunlop Tires Operations, S.A, v. Browm

Supreme Court of the United States, 2011.

131 S. Ct. 2846,

180 L. Ed. 2d 796.

Facts: On 18 April 2004, two boys from North Carolina died from injuries suffered in a bus wreck outside of Paris, France. The boys were traveling to Charles de Gaulle Airport to catch a flight back to North Carolina when the fatal accident occurred. The accident occurred when the piles on one of the buses tires; manufactured by Goodyear Turkey, separated and caused the vehicle accident. The estate administrators of the two boys filed suit against the Goodyear Dunlop Tire Organization’s foreign affiliates Goodyear Luxembourg, Goodyear France, and Goodyear Turkey in a court in North Carolina. In their suit; the plaintiffs, the estate administrators, sought relief from Goodyear Dunlop Tire Organization and its foreign affiliates; the defendants on a number of points. The plaintiffs argued that the tire that caused the accident was poorly designed, constructed, tested and inspected and that the defendants also failed to warn distributors and buyers; of the tire, about defects inherent in the tire (LexisNexis, 2011). The defendants in this case filed a motion to have the case dismissed claiming that the North Carolina trial court did not have general personal jurisdiction over the defendants. The defendants filed affidavits to show that any perceived business relationship with North Carolina was only the result of their parent company’s; Goodyear Dunlop Tire Organization, distribution chain not direct marketing or sales on their part within the state.

In their decision to deny the defendants request for dismissal the North Carolina court cited the following facts to show that they did have jurisdiction over the defendants. Both of the deceased had died from injuries sustained when a tire manufactured by the defendants failed causing a vehicle accident. The tire was manufactured by one on the defendants, Goodyear Turkey. The...