Perkins v. Benguet Consolidated Mining Co.

Facts

Perkins, who did not live in Ohio, sued the Benguet Consolidated Mining Company in Ohio state court in two actions in personam (actions against the defendant personally). The company was organized under the laws of the Philippine Islands, where it owned and had operated gold and silver mines. In one action Perkins sought approximately $68,400 in dividends she said were due her as a stockholder. In the other she claimed $2,500,000 in damages, largely because the company had not issued her certificates for 120,000 shares of its stock. Her claims did not arise in Ohio and did not relate to the company's activities there. The Japanese occupation of the Philippines had halted the company's mining operations. During that time its president, who was also its general manager and principal stockholder, returned to his home in Clermont County, Ohio. From an office there he kept company files, carried on business correspondence, and drew salary checks. He kept two active bank accounts holding substantial company funds. A bank in Hamilton County, Ohio, was the company's stock transfer agent. Several directors' meetings were held at his office or home in Clermont County. He supervised policies on rehabilitating the company's properties and sent funds to buy machinery. The company owned no mining property in Ohio. A summons was served on the president in Ohio while he was acting as president.

Issues

1. Does the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment prohibit Ohio from exercising in personam jurisdiction over a foreign corporation, served through its president in Ohio, on a claim that did not arise in Ohio and does not relate to its activities there?
2. Does federal due process require Ohio to open its courts to such a claim against a foreign corporation?

Holding

The company carried on in Ohio a continuous and systematic, though limited, part of its general business, and its president was served there while doing that business. Under those circumstances, federal due process neither barred nor required Ohio to take jurisdiction over a claim not arising there. Whether Ohio courts will do so is a question of Ohio law.