Civil Procedure
Burger King Corp. v. Rudzewicz
United States Supreme Court
471 U.S. 462 (1985)
Facts
Brian MacShara and John Rudzewicz (defendants) jointly applied for a Burger King franchise in Detroit. MacShara and Rudzewicz negotiated the deal with Burger King Corp.’s (plaintiff) Michigan’s district office and the Miami headquarters. The two men were granted a franchise, and MacShara attended a management course on how to run a Burger King in Miami. Rudzewicz purchased $165,000 in restaurant equipment from Burger King corporate division in Miami. Under the franchise agreement, MacShara and Rudzewicz were to remit franchise fees and royalties to Burger King Corp. in Miami. MacShara and John Rudzewicz were unable to make these payments due to low finances. Burger King Corp. sued them for breach of contract in federal district court in Florida. Burger King claimed that federal court was appropriate under diversity and trademark jurisdiction. MacShara and Rudzewicz claimed that the court did not have personal jurisdiction over them. The court rejected their objection and awarded Burger King damages and injunctive relief. The court of appeals reversed the judgment, concluding that the district court did not have personal jurisdiction. The United States Supreme Court granted certiorari.
Rule of Law
The rule of law is the black letter law upon which the court rested its decision. To access this section, start your 7-day free trial of Quimbee for Law Students.
Issue
The issue section includes the dispositive legal issue in the case phrased as a question. To access this section, start your 7-day free trial of Quimbee for Law Students.
Holding and Reasoning (Brennan, J.)
The holding and reasoning section includes:
- A “yes” or “no” answer to the question framed in the issue section;
- A summary of the majority or plurality opinion, using the CREAC method; and
- The procedural disposition (e.g. reversed and remanded, affirmed, etc.).
To access this section, start your 7-day free trial of Quimbee for Law Students.
Dissent (Stevens, J.)
The dissent section is for members only and includes a summary of the dissenting judge or justice’s opinion. To access this section, start your 7-day free trial of Quimbee for Law Students.
Access This Case Brief for Free
With a 7-Day Free Trial Membership
Here's why 111,000 law students rely on our case briefs:
- Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners not other law students.
- The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet.
- 12,715 briefs - keyed to 171 casebooks.
- Uniform format for every case brief.
- Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language.
- Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions.
- Ability to tag case briefs in an outlining tool.
- Top-notch customer support.
