The Hertz Corporation v. Melinda Friend et al. (559 U.S. 77)
U.S. Supreme Court · decided February 23, 2010 · Supreme Court Database (Spaeth)
- Citation
- 559 U.S. 77 · 130 S. Ct. 1181
- Decided
- February 23, 2010
- Term
- October Term 2009
- Vote
- 9–0
- Majority author
- Justice Breyer
- Issue area
- Judicial Power
- Disposition
- Vacated and remanded
- Outcome
- Petitioning party won
- Ideological direction
- Liberal
Opinion excerpt
Justice Breyer delivered the opinion of the Court. The federal diversity jurisdiction statute provides that “a corporation shall be deemed to be a citizen of any State by which it has been incorporated and of the State where it has its principal place of business.” 28 U. S. C. § 1332(c)(1) (emphasis added). We seek here to resolve different interpretations that the Circuits have given this phrase. In doing so, we place primary weight upon the need for judicial administration of a jurisdictional statute to remain as simple as possible. And we conclude that the phrase “principal place of business” refers to the place where the corporation’s high level officers direct, control, and coordinate the corporation’s activities. Lower federal courts have often metaphorically called that place the corporation’s “nerve center.” See, e. g., Wisconsin Knife Works v. National Metal Crofters, 781 F. 2d 1280, 1282 (CA7 1986); Scot Typewriter Co. v. Underwood Corp., 170 F. Supp. 862, 865 (SDNY 1959) (Weinfeld, J.). We believe that the “nerve center” will typically be found at a corporation’s headquarters. I In September 2007, respondents Melinda Friend and John Nhieu, two California citizens, sued petitioner, the Hertz Corporation, in a California state court. They sought damages for what they claimed were violations of California’s wage and hour laws. App. to Pet. for Cert. 20a. And they…
Excerpt of a 34,810-character opinion. The full text and citation network load in the interactive viewer above.