International Shoe Co. v. Washington

E362100

United States Supreme Court case landmark civil procedure case

International Shoe Co. v. Washington is a landmark 1945 U.S. Supreme Court decision that established the modern "minimum contacts" standard for determining when a state may exercise personal jurisdiction over an out-of-state defendant.

Try in SPARQL Jump to: Surface forms Disambiguation Statements Elicitation Referenced by

All labels observed (3)

Label	Occurrences
International Shoe Co. v. Washington canonical	1
International Shoe Co. v. Washington, 326 U.S. 310 (1945)	1
The State of Washington sought to collect unemployment compensation taxes from International Shoe Company for activities conducted within the state.	1

How this entity was disambiguated

This entity first appeared as the object of triple T3488653 — resolving that mention is where its identity was fixed. The disambiguator weighed these candidate entities and picked the highlighted one (or “None”, minting a new entity). This is how homonymy is resolved: the same surface form can point to different entities.

NED1 Entity disambiguation (via context triple) gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07

Target entity: International Shoe Co. v. Washington
Context triple: [United States Supreme Court cases of the Stone Court, includesCase, International Shoe Co. v. Washington]

A. Chiafalo v. Washington
Chiafalo v. Washington is a 2020 U.S. Supreme Court case that unanimously upheld states’ authority to penalize or replace “faithless electors” who do not vote in line with their state’s popular vote in presidential elections.
B. Crawford v. Washington
Crawford v. Washington is a landmark 2004 U.S. Supreme Court decision that reshaped Confrontation Clause jurisprudence by holding that testimonial hearsay is inadmissible against a criminal defendant unless the witness is unavailable and there was a prior opportunity for cross-examination.
C. Ex parte Young
Ex parte Young is a landmark 1908 U.S. Supreme Court decision that created a legal fiction allowing suits in federal court against state officials to stop ongoing violations of federal law, despite state sovereign immunity under the Eleventh Amendment.
D. Wards Cove Packing Co. v. Atonio
Wards Cove Packing Co. v. Atonio is a 1989 U.S. Supreme Court case that narrowed the standards for proving employment discrimination under Title VII, prompting Congress to later revise those standards in the Civil Rights Act of 1991.
E. West Coast Hotel Co. v. Parrish
West Coast Hotel Co. v. Parrish is a 1937 U.S. Supreme Court decision that upheld minimum wage laws and effectively ended the Lochner era by allowing greater government regulation of economic conditions.
F. None of above. chosen
G. Unsure - the case is ambiguous/there is not enough information to decide.

NED2 Entity disambiguation (via description) gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07

Target entity: International Shoe Co. v. Washington
Target entity description: International Shoe Co. v. Washington is a landmark 1945 U.S. Supreme Court decision that established the modern "minimum contacts" standard for determining when a state may exercise personal jurisdiction over an out-of-state defendant.

A. Chiafalo v. Washington
Chiafalo v. Washington is a 2020 U.S. Supreme Court case that unanimously upheld states’ authority to penalize or replace “faithless electors” who do not vote in line with their state’s popular vote in presidential elections.
B. Crawford v. Washington
Crawford v. Washington is a landmark 2004 U.S. Supreme Court decision that reshaped Confrontation Clause jurisprudence by holding that testimonial hearsay is inadmissible against a criminal defendant unless the witness is unavailable and there was a prior opportunity for cross-examination.
C. Ex parte Young
Ex parte Young is a landmark 1908 U.S. Supreme Court decision that created a legal fiction allowing suits in federal court against state officials to stop ongoing violations of federal law, despite state sovereign immunity under the Eleventh Amendment.
D. Wards Cove Packing Co. v. Atonio
Wards Cove Packing Co. v. Atonio is a 1989 U.S. Supreme Court case that narrowed the standards for proving employment discrimination under Title VII, prompting Congress to later revise those standards in the Civil Rights Act of 1991.
E. West Coast Hotel Co. v. Parrish
West Coast Hotel Co. v. Parrish is a 1937 U.S. Supreme Court decision that upheld minimum wage laws and effectively ended the Lochner era by allowing greater government regulation of economic conditions.
F. None of above. chosen

Statements (46)

Predicate	Object
instanceOf	United States Supreme Court case ⓘ landmark civil procedure case ⓘ
appliesTo	corporate defendants ⓘ nonresident defendants ⓘ
areaOfLaw	civil procedure ⓘ constitutional law ⓘ
citation	326 U.S. 310 ⓘ
citationStyle	International Shoe Co. v. Washington, 326 U.S. 310 (1945) ⓘ linked to: International Shoe Co. v. Washington
constitutionalProvisionInterpreted	Fourteenth Amendment Due Process Clause ⓘ linked to: Due Process Clause
country	United States ⓘ linked to: United States of America
court	Supreme Court of the United States ⓘ
decisionDate	1945-12-03 ⓘ
decisionType	majority opinion ⓘ
educationUse	commonly taught in first-year U.S. law school civil procedure courses ⓘ
factSummary	International Shoe Company, incorporated in Missouri and headquartered in St. Louis, employed salesmen in Washington who solicited orders for shoes. ⓘ The State of Washington sought to collect unemployment compensation taxes from International Shoe Company for activities conducted within the state. ⓘ linked to: International Shoe Co. v. Washington
holding	A state may exercise personal jurisdiction over an out-of-state defendant if the defendant has minimum contacts with the forum such that the suit does not offend traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice. ⓘ
impact	became foundational precedent for modern personal jurisdiction doctrine in the United States ⓘ influenced later cases such as Asahi Metal Industry Co. v. Superior Court ⓘ influenced later cases such as Burger King Corp. v. Rudzewicz ⓘ influenced later cases such as World-Wide Volkswagen Corp. v. Woodson ⓘ replaced strict territorial presence rules for personal jurisdiction with a contacts-based analysis ⓘ
jurisdictionQuestion	Whether Washington could exercise in personam jurisdiction over International Shoe Company consistent with due process. ⓘ
jurisdictionTestElement	fair play and substantial justice ⓘ quality and nature of the defendant's activities in the forum state ⓘ relationship between the contacts and the cause of action ⓘ
jurisdictionType	specific jurisdiction ⓘ
keyPhrase	minimum contacts ⓘ traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice ⓘ
language	English ⓘ
legalIssue	due process ⓘ personal jurisdiction ⓘ state court jurisdiction over out-of-state defendants ⓘ
majorityOpinionBy	Chief Justice Harlan F. Stone ⓘ linked to: Justice Harlan F. Stone
overruledPrecedent	limited the strict territorial approach of Pennoyer v. Neff without expressly overruling it ⓘ
page	310 ⓘ
petitioner	International Shoe Company ⓘ
proceduralPosture	Appeal from the Supreme Court of Washington ⓘ
reporter	United States Reports ⓘ
respondent	State of Washington ⓘ linked to: Washington State, United States
ruleOfLaw	Due process requires only that in order to subject a defendant to a judgment in personam, if he be not present within the territory of the forum, he have certain minimum contacts with it. ⓘ
standardEstablished	minimum contacts ⓘ traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice ⓘ
subjectMatter	state taxation of out-of-state corporations ⓘ
volume	326 ⓘ
vote	unanimous ⓘ

How these facts were elicited

Referenced by (3)

Full triples — surface form annotated when it differs from this entity's canonical label.

United States Supreme Court cases of the Stone Court → includesCase → International Shoe Co. v. Washington ⓘ

International Shoe Co. v. Washington → factSummary → The State of Washington sought to collect unemployment compensation taxes from International Shoe Company for activities conducted within the state. ⓘ

linked to: International Shoe Co. v. Washington

International Shoe Co. v. Washington → citationStyle → International Shoe Co. v. Washington, 326 U.S. 310 (1945) ⓘ