Bendix Autolite Corp. v. Midwesco Enterprises, Inc., et al. (486 U.S. 888)

U.S. Supreme Court · decided June 17, 1988 · Supreme Court Database (Spaeth)

Citation
486 U.S. 888 · 108 S. Ct. 2218
Decided
June 17, 1988
Term
October Term 1987
Vote
8–1
Majority author
Justice Kennedy
Issue area
Due Process
Disposition
Affirmed
Outcome
Petitioning party lost
Ideological direction
Liberal
Constitutional ruling
State/territorial law held unconstitutional

Opinion excerpt

Justice Kennedy delivered the opinion of the Court. Ohio recognizes a 4-year statute of limitations in actions for breach of contract or fraud. The statute is tolled, however, for any period that a person or corporation is not “present” in the State. To be present in Ohio, a foreign corporation must appoint an agent for service of process, which operates as consent to the general jurisdiction of the Ohio courts. Applying well-settled constitutional principles, we find the Ohio statute that suspends limitations protection for out-of-state entities is a violation of the Commerce Clause. I — I Underlying the constitutional question presented by the Ohio statute of limitations rules is a rather ordinary contract dispute. In 1974, Midwesco Enterprises, Inc., agreed with Bendix Autolite Corporation to deliver and install a boiler system at a Bendix facility in Fostoria, Ohio. Dissatisfied with the work, Bendix claimed that the boiler system had been installed improperly and that it was insufficient to produce the quantity of steam specified in the contract. This diversity action was filed against Midwesco in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio in 1980. Bendix is a Delaware corporation with its principal place of business in Ohio; Midwesco is an Illinois corporation with its principal place of business in Illinois. When Midwesco asserted the Ohio…

Excerpt of a 22,618-character opinion. The full text and citation network load in the interactive viewer above.

← Back to the decisions database