- All Best Essays, Term Papers and Book Report

Gafford V. General Electric Company

Essay by   •  November 3, 2012  •  Essay  •  364 Words (2 Pages)  •  3,324 Views

Essay Preview: Gafford V. General Electric Company

Report this essay
Page 1 of 2

* Gafford v. General Electric Company

➢ Carol Gafford sued General Electric because she felt she was being discriminated against based on her gender

➢ The case was filed in state court; however, it was transferred to federal court

➢ Gafford lost and appealed because she felt that the case should have never went to federal court

➢ The main point that is disputed is whether GE's principal place of business is in Kentucky

* Because the facility that she worked at employed over 9,000 employees it is reasonable to concluded that it was a principal place of business

* However, due to the fact that a corporation can only have one principal place of business, GE submitted evidence that proved that Schenectady, New York is the principal place of business and not Kentucky.

➢ This evidence was not refuted by the plaintiff

➢ This case was ruled in favor of the defendant, General Electric, because it was determined that GE in not incorporated in Kentucky and that is not a principal place of business. This makes the corporation not a citizen of Kentucky for the purposes of diversity.

* World-Wide Volkswagen Corp. vs. Woodson

➢ Mr. and Mrs. Robinson filed a product liability against World-Wide Volkswagen in an Oklahoma Court

* This was filed to collect damages that were caused involving an accident with a car that was purchased in New York.

➢ The case went to the Oklahoma Supreme Court because the defendants felt Oklahoma could not exercise jurisdiction over them in New York.

➢ Because the defendant does not conduct business in Oklahoma it is considered an unusual circumstance that a car sold in New York to a New York resident got in a car accident while passing through Oklahoma

➢ It was argued that because of the car's design it was "foreseeable" that the car would cause an accident in Oklahoma

* This did not uphold in court

➢ The court reversed the decision in favor of the defendant, World-Wide Corporation, because there was no basis for Oklahoma jurisdiction over World-Wide.

* Their market consists of New York, New Jersey, and Connecticut therefore there is no evidence of record that their cars are sold out of this area. Though it is foreseeable that a purchaser may take the car to Oklahoma, it does not satisfy the requirement of contact with the forum state.



Download as:   txt (2.3 Kb)   pdf (133.7 Kb)   docx (9.5 Kb)  
Continue for 1 more page »
Only available on
Citation Generator

(2012, 11). Gafford V. General Electric Company. Retrieved 11, 2012, from

"Gafford V. General Electric Company" 11 2012. 2012. 11 2012 <>.

"Gafford V. General Electric Company.", 11 2012. Web. 11 2012. <>.

"Gafford V. General Electric Company." 11, 2012. Accessed 11, 2012.