Case Citation
Legal Case Name

BNSF Ry. Co. v. Tyrrell Case Brief

Supreme Court of the United States2017Docket #65273292
137 S. Ct. 1549 198 L. Ed. 2d 36 41 I.E.R. Cas. (BNA) 1809 26 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. S 612 85 U.S.L.W. 4286 2017 WL 2322834 2017 U.S. LEXIS 3395

Audio Insights: Learn Cases on The Go

Transform downtime into productive study time with our premium audio insights. Perfect for commutes, workouts, or visual breaks from reading.

Reinforces complex concepts Improves retention Multi-modal learning

Why Top Law Students (And Those Aspiring to Be) Use LSD+ Briefs

Let's be real, law school is a marathon. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full case system is designed by Harvard Law School and MIT grads to match your pace: Quick summaries when you're slammed, detailed analysis when you need to go deep. Only LSD+ offers this kind of flexibility to genuinely fit your study flow.

Adaptive Case Views

Toggle between Flash, Standard, and Expanded. Get what you need, when you need it.

Exam-Ready IRAC Format

We deliver the precise structure professors look for in exam answers.

Complex Cases, Clarified

We break down dense legal reasoning into something digestible, helping you grasp core concepts.

Case Brief Summary & Legal Analysis

General Brief
4 min read

tl;dr: A railroad company with significant operations in Montana was sued there for injuries occurring elsewhere. The Supreme Court held that Montana lacked general personal jurisdiction because the railroad, while doing business in the state, was not “at home” there.

Legal Significance: The case reinforces the restrictive “at home” standard for general personal jurisdiction established in Daimler, clarifying that substantial, continuous business activity alone is insufficient. It also holds that the Federal Employers’ Liability Act’s (FELA) venue provision does not create a special jurisdictional rule for railroads.

BNSF Ry. Co. v. Tyrrell Law School Study Guide

Use this case brief structure for your own legal analysis. Focus on the IRAC methodology to excel in law school exams and cold calls.

Case Facts & Court Holding

Key Facts & Case Background

Two railroad employees sued BNSF Railway Company (BNSF) in Montana state court under the Federal Employers’ Liability Act (FELA) for injuries sustained on the job. Neither plaintiff resided in Montana, nor did their injuries arise from or relate to any work performed in Montana. BNSF, a large interstate railroad, was incorporated in Delaware and had its principal place of business in Texas. While BNSF conducted significant business in Montana—maintaining over 2,000 miles of track and employing more than 2,000 workers there—these operations constituted a relatively small percentage of its nationwide activities (e.g., about 6% of its total track mileage and less than 5% of its workforce). BNSF moved to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction. The Montana Supreme Court, consolidating the cases, found that it could exercise general personal jurisdiction. It reasoned that FELA’s venue provision, 45 U.S.C. § 56, authorized jurisdiction wherever a railroad was “doing business.” Alternatively, it held that BNSF was “found within” Montana under state law and that the due process limits of Daimler AG v. Bauman did not apply to FELA claims against railroads.

Court Holding & Legal Precedent

Issue: Does the Federal Employers’ Liability Act’s venue provision confer personal jurisdiction over a railroad in any state where it does business, and if not, does the Due Process Clause permit a state to exercise general personal jurisdiction over a corporation that has substantial in-state operations but is not incorporated or headquartered there?

No. The Court reversed the Montana Supreme Court, holding that FELA § Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse c

Master Every Case Faster

Unlock premium legal analysis that helps you quickly understand complex cases, designed by Harvard Law and MIT graduates. It's about working smarter, not just harder.

Start 14-Day Free Trial

Thousands of students are already saving time and gaining clarity. Why not you?

IRAC Legal Analysis

Premium Feature Unlock

Complete IRAC Analysis for Higher Grades

IRAC (Issue, Rule, Analysis, Conclusion) is the exact format professors want to see in your exam answers. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full briefs combine holding, analysis, and rule statements formatted to match what A+ students produce in exams. These structured briefs help reinforce the essential legal reasoning patterns expected in law school.

Legal Issue

Does the Federal Employers’ Liability Act’s venue provision confer personal jurisdiction over a railroad in any state where it does business, and if not, does the Due Process Clause permit a state to exercise general personal jurisdiction over a corporation that has substantial in-state operations but is not incorporated or headquartered there?

Conclusion

This decision solidifies the narrow scope of general personal jurisdiction post-*Daimler*, making Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ulla

Legal Rule

The Federal Employers' Liability Act (FELA), 45 U.S.C. § 56, addresses federal Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetu

Legal Analysis

The Court's analysis proceeded in two parts. First, it addressed the statutory Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in volupta

Flash-to-Full Case Opinions

Flash Summary

  • FELA § 56 is a federal venue and subject-matter jurisdiction statute;
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deser

Master Every Case Faster

Unlock premium legal analysis that helps you quickly understand complex cases, designed by Harvard Law and MIT graduates. It's about working smarter, not just harder.

Start 14-Day Free Trial

Thousands of students are already saving time and gaining clarity. Why not you?

A lawyer is a person who writes a 10,000-word document and calls it a 'brief'.

✨ Enjoy an ad-free experience with LSD+