Specific Personal Jurisdiction
Ex parte Aladdin Mfg. Corp., et al., [Ms. 1170864, 1170894, 1171182, 1171196, 1171198, Dec. 20, 2019] __ So. 3d __ (Ala. 2019). A plurality opinion by Justice Stewart (Stewart, J.; Parker, C.J., and Wise, J., concur; Bryan, J., concurs in the result; Bolin, Sellers, and Mendheim, JJ., dissent; Shaw and Mitchell, JJ., recuse themselves), denies petitions for writs of mandamus challenging personal jurisdiction filed by out-of-state companies alleged to have deposited toxic wastewater into streams which subsequently contaminated Centre Water’s and Gadsden Water’s downstream water sources in Alabama. The opinion concludes that where out-of-state conduct causes injury in Alabama, the tort is committed in Alabama, where the injury occurs. Ms. *49. In regard to the foreseeability analysis, Justice Stewart “reiterate[s] that foreseeability alone is insufficient to confer specific personal jurisdiction. In this situation, however, Centre Water’s and Gadsden Water’s allegations, which we are required to take as true, demonstrate that the remaining defendants continue to discharge PFC-containing chemicals in their industrial wastewater, despite allegedly knowing that the chemicals would enter the Coosa River.” Ms. *53.