Case Citation
Legal Case Name

WORLD-WIDE VOLKSWAGEN CORP. v. WOODSON Case Brief

Supreme Court of United States1980
444 U.S. 286 100 S.Ct. 559 62 L.Ed.2d 490 Civil Procedure Constitutional Law Federal Courts Torts

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 New York car dealer and distributor were sued in Oklahoma after a car they sold was in an accident there. The Supreme Court held Oklahoma lacked personal jurisdiction because the defendants had no “minimum contacts” with the state, clarifying the limits of foreseeability.

Legal Significance: This case established that foreseeability alone is insufficient for personal jurisdiction. A defendant must purposefully avail itself of the forum state’s benefits; the plaintiff’s unilateral activity cannot create the necessary minimum contacts required by the Due Process Clause.

WORLD-WIDE VOLKSWAGEN CORP. v. WOODSON 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

Respondents, New York residents, purchased an Audi automobile from petitioner Seaway Volkswagen, a retail dealer in New York. Petitioner World-Wide Volkswagen Corp. was the regional distributor for New York, New Jersey, and Connecticut. The following year, the respondents were driving through Oklahoma en route to a new home in Arizona when their vehicle was struck from behind, resulting in a fire and severe injuries. They filed a products liability suit in an Oklahoma state court against the manufacturer, importer, World-Wide, and Seaway. World-Wide and Seaway, both New York corporations, made special appearances to contest the court’s exercise of in personam jurisdiction over them. The petitioners conducted no business in Oklahoma, had no agents there, did not advertise there, and did not ship or sell products to the state. Their only connection to Oklahoma was the single, fortuitous event of the respondents’ car being involved in an accident within its borders. The Oklahoma Supreme Court upheld the trial court’s assertion of jurisdiction.

Court Holding & Legal Precedent

Issue: May a state court, consistent with the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, exercise in personam jurisdiction over nonresident defendants whose only connection with the forum state is the fortuitous arrival of a product they sold into that state?

No. The Court held that Oklahoma’s exercise of jurisdiction over the nonresident 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 o

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

May a state court, consistent with the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, exercise in personam jurisdiction over nonresident defendants whose only connection with the forum state is the fortuitous arrival of a product they sold into that state?

Conclusion

This case significantly narrowed the "stream of commerce" theory and reinforced the 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.

Legal Rule

For a state to exercise personal jurisdiction over a nonresident defendant, the 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, con

Legal Analysis

The Court, in an opinion by Justice White, refined the "minimum contacts" 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 voluptate velit esse cillum dolore

Flash-to-Full Case Opinions

Flash Summary

  • A state court cannot exercise personal jurisdiction over 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 offici

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?

The difference between ordinary and extraordinary is practice.

✨ Enjoy an ad-free experience with LSD+