1) Why are the Robinsons suing Seaway and World-Wide anyway? (See the short passage from Blackmun's opinion at pp. 608-09.) Audi and Volkswagen are the ones with the deep pockets and there is no problem getting personal jurisdiction over them. Why do the Robinsons want Seaway and World-Wide in as defendants?
2) The denial of a certain kind of writ is the decision that is being appealed to the Supreme Court in World-Wide Volkswagen. What is that writ? Can you imagine the writ being abused?
3) What is the type of foreseeability that Justice White rejects as a ground of PJ? What kind of foreseeability is relevant for PJ?
4) Is the foreseeability of being haled into court in a state (see pp. 602-03) a meaningful criterion for determining when a court should say PJ exists? Doesn’t foreseeability itself depend upon what courts say about PJ?
5) What does World-Wide Volkswagen say about situations in which a manufacturer or distributor sells a product to a middleman, anticipating that there will be a subsequent sale of that product to a consumer in the forum state? Why should that situation be treated differently from cases when the ultimate consumer moves the product into the forum state himself?
6) It appears as if a two-pronged test for PJ is emerging. One prong concerns the convenience to the parties and the interests of the forum state (as in McGee) and the other concerns the forum state's right to assert power over the defendant as a result of the defendant's purposefully directing his activities toward the forum state. What role does each prong play in White's opinion and Brennan's dissent?
7) What would White say about the pollution example discussed by Brennan on pp. 606? Is there a way of distinguishing it from the facts of World-Wide Volkswagen?
8) What about the argument that Seaway and World-Wide purposefully directed their activities toward Oklahoma because they were paid extra for the fact that the cars could be driven in Oklahoma? After all, if Seaway and World-Wide sold cars that could not be driven in Oklahoma, they would undoubtedly have received less money (even from buyers in the tri-state area).
9) What if the accident had been in Pennsylvania and the Robinsons had sued there?