Bristol-Myers Squibb Company Petitioner v. the Superior Court of San Francisco County, Responde — Werdegar, J…

Summary

The dissent would hold that California lacks specific personal jurisdiction over the nonresident Plavix plaintiffs’ claims because their injuries arose from conduct, purchases, prescriptions, and drug use outside California, with no substantial connection to BMS’s California activities. It agrees that general jurisdiction is absent and concludes that similarity between nationwide claims and California plaintiffs’ claims, along with joinder and litigation efficiency, cannot satisfy the relatedness requirement imposed by due process. Justices Chin and Corrigan concurred in the dissent.