HDI Global SE v. Superior Court of California, Los Angeles County, et al.

This case presents a longstanding and acknowledged conflict among federal and state courts regarding the exercise of specific personal jurisdiction over insurance companies. Under the Due Process Clause, a state court may exercise specific personal jurisdiction over a defendant only if the defendant “purposefully avails” itself of the privilege of conducting activities within the forum State. Petitioner is a German insurance company with no activities in California. Petitioner was nevertheless held by a California state court to be subject to personal jurisdiction in California in an insurance-coverage dispute with the Florida-based affiliate of its Spanish insured. The sole basis for the court’s assertion of personal jurisdiction was that, in the insurance policy, petitioner had extended defense and indemnity coverage to the insured on a worldwide basis—which was deemed to constitute purposeful availment by petitioner of the benefits of doing business in California. That holding reflects a split that has been acknowledged for four decades and has divided the federal courts of appeals 2-8 and state courts of last resort 6-5. The question presented is: Whether an insurer may constitutionally be subjected to personal jurisdiction in every forum within the geographic scope of a territory-of-coverage provision in an insurance policy, on the theory that a worldwide provision constitutes purposeful availment of the privilege of conducting activities within any and all jurisdictions.