Case Citation
Legal Case Name

Burger King Corp. v. Rudzewicz Case Brief

Supreme Court of the United States1985Docket #428311
85 L. Ed. 2d 528 105 S. Ct. 2174 471 U.S. 462 1985 U.S. LEXIS 14 53 U.S.L.W. 4541 Civil Procedure Constitutional Law Contracts

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
3 min read

tl;dr: A Michigan franchisee was sued in Florida by the franchisor. The Supreme Court held that Florida could exercise personal jurisdiction because the franchisee purposefully established a long-term, substantial relationship with the Florida-based corporation, making litigation there foreseeable.

Legal Significance: This case clarifies that a contract with an out-of-state party can establish minimum contacts for specific personal jurisdiction, provided it creates a substantial, continuing relationship and the defendant purposefully directed activities toward the forum state, even without physical presence.

Burger King Corp. v. Rudzewicz 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

Defendant John Rudzewicz, a Michigan resident and sophisticated businessman, entered into a 20-year franchise agreement with Burger King Corp., a Florida corporation with its principal offices in Miami. Although Rudzewicz primarily dealt with Burger King’s Michigan district office, he negotiated key terms with the Miami headquarters via mail and telephone. The franchise agreement stipulated that the relationship was established in Miami, governed by Florida law, and required all payments and notices to be sent to the Miami headquarters. Rudzewicz never physically visited Florida, though his business partner attended a brief training session there. When a dispute arose over payments, Burger King sued Rudzewicz in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida, alleging breach of contract. Rudzewicz contested the court’s exercise of personal jurisdiction, arguing he lacked the requisite minimum contacts with Florida. The district court found jurisdiction, but the Eleventh Circuit reversed, concluding that jurisdiction would offend due process.

Court Holding & Legal Precedent

Issue: Did the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment permit a federal court in Florida to exercise specific personal jurisdiction over a non-resident defendant who entered into a long-term franchise contract with a Florida-based corporation?

Yes. The exercise of personal jurisdiction over Rudzewicz in Florida did not 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

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

Did the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment permit a federal court in Florida to exercise specific personal jurisdiction over a non-resident defendant who entered into a long-term franchise contract with a Florida-based corporation?

Conclusion

This case established that a long-term contractual relationship with a forum resident 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

Legal Rule

For specific personal jurisdiction to comport with due process, a non-resident defendant 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

Legal Analysis

The Court applied a two-part test for specific personal jurisdiction. First, it 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, qui

Flash-to-Full Case Opinions

Flash Summary

  • A contract with a forum resident can support specific jurisdiction if
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. Exce

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?

If we desire respect for the law, we must first make the law respectable.

✨ Enjoy an ad-free experience with LSD+