Court of Appeals

of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,____________________

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A19I0157. SUBARU CORPORATION et al. v. ALEX SCANLON, AS

EXECUTOR OF THE ESTATE OF BARRY SCANLON et al.

Barry Scanlon died from injuries he incurred in an automobile collision in

Florida. At the time of the collision, Scanlon was driving a Subaru Outback he had

bought in Georgia. Scanlon’s estate and surviving sons filed a wrongful death action

in Georgia against multiple defendants, including Subaru Corporation (“SBR”), a

Japanese corporation, and Subaru of America, Inc. (“SOA”), a New Jersey

corporation. 

SBR and SOA filed motions to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction. In

response, the plaintiffs argued, among other things, that SOA was a resident of

Georgia under OCGA § 14-2-510 (b) because it was registered to do business here.

SOA argued that in light of the United States Supreme Court’s decisions in Daimler

AG v. Bauman, 571 U. S. 117 (134 SCt. 746, 187 LE2d 624) (2014), and BristolMyers Squibb Co. v. Superior Court of Cal., __ U. S. __ (137 SCt. 1773, 198 LE2d

395) (2017), OCGA § 14-2-510 (b) is unconstitutional to the extent that it renders a

foreign corporation a Georgia resident when the corporation registers to do business

in Georgia. The trial court denied the motions to dismiss. As to SOA, the court ruled

that it is subject to personal jurisdiction in this state because it is a Georgia resident

pursuant to OCGA § 14-2-510 (b). SOA and SBR now seek interlocutory review in

this Court.

The Supreme Court of Georgia “has exclusive jurisdiction over all cases

involving construction of the Constitution of the State of Georgia and of the United

States and all cases in which the constitutionality of a law, ordinance, or

January 31, 2019
constitutional provision has been called into question.” Atlanta Independent School

System v. Lane, 266 Ga. 657, 657 (1) (469 SE2d 22) (1996); Ga. Const. of 1983, Art.

VI, Sec. VI, Para. II (1). In light of SOA’s constitutional challenge to OCGA § 14-2-

510 (b), the trial court’sruling that SOA issubject to personal jurisdiction in Georgia

because it is a Georgia resident under thatstatute appears to be “effectively a distinct

ruling on the constitutional issues.” See Rouse v. Dept. ofNatural Resources, 271 Ga.

726, 728 (1) (524 SE2d 455) (1999); see also Hancock County v. Williams, 230 Ga.

723, 724 (1) (198 SE2d 659) (1973). Thus, this case appears to fall within the

Supreme Court’s exclusive subject-matter jurisdiction. We further note that the

Supreme Court has “the ultimate responsibility for construing the constitutional

provisions regarding appellate jurisdiction.” Saxton v. Coastal Dialysis & Med.

Clinic, 267 Ga. 177, 178 (476 SE2d 587) (1996).

Accordingly, this application is herebyTRANSFERRED to the SupremeCourt

for disposition.

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________

I certify that the above is a true extract from

the minutes of the Court of Appeals of Georgia.

Witness my signature and the seal of said court

hereto affixed the day and year last above written.

, Clerk.

01/31/2019