Remote Work's Complication of Companies' Personal Jurisdiction Standings: Morphing the Historical Analysis to Fit Modern Remote Work Characteristics

Personal jurisdiction ensures that the proper forum adjudicates civil disputes to prevent burdening a defendant with litigating in inconvenient forums. International Shoe Co. v. Washington established that defendants must have minimum contacts with the forum state such that exercise of jurisdiction comports with fair play and substantial justice. Following International Shoe, many cases have provided examples of the minimum contacts that would establish personal jurisdiction. However, the ability for employees to work remotely from their homes using technological devices and software has exponentially increased over the past five years. Because of the increased ability to work remotely from anywhere in the United States, companies may be responsible for litigation in forums they never anticipated. To maintain notions of fair play and substantial justice, courts should create a uniform analysis of a company’s contacts with a forum state, through its remote workers, meeting International Shoe’s minimum contacts requirement. This is an emerging issue; the Supreme Court has yet to rule on this, and a limited number of lower courts have attempted to establish specific factors. This Comment discusses how courts can create a uniform approach to remote worker personal jurisdiction issues that may arise specific to remote work technology.