Abstract
Today, it is a generally well-recognized principle that if a foreign corporation is doing business within a state it is subject to the in personam jurisdiction of that state. The law has, however, had much difficulty in defining the term "doing business." In the case of International Shoe v. State of Washington, the Supreme Court abandoned the doing business test in favor of a test of "minimum contacts" and "fair play and substantial justice." This new test has done little to solve the dilemma, and consequently most states still adhere to the old "doing business" concepts. Nowhere is the confusion greater than in the situation where the foreign corporation is an interstate carrier and its only activity within the state is the maintenance of a passenger and freight solicitation office. This is a problem of considerable magnitude in the law today, as the major railroads maintain solicitation offices in almost all of the states in the country.
I. Introduction
II. Conflict of Laws—State and Federal
III. Solicitation Plus Rule
IV. Mere Solicitation rule
V. Constitutional Limitations on State Law … A. Due Process Limitations … B. Interstate Commerce Limitations
VI. Forum Non Conveniens
VII. Cause of Action Limitations
VIII. Nebraska Law
IX. Conclusion
Recommended Citation
William D. Sutter Jr.,
Solicitation by an Interstate Carrier—Is It Doing Business?,
46 Neb. L. Rev. 122
(1967)
Available at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/nlr/vol46/iss1/8