Can You Sue a Foreign Manufacturer in Georgia for a Defective Product?
On this page
Yes, if a Georgia court can exercise personal jurisdiction over the company and the company is properly served. Georgia’s Long Arm Statute reaches a nonresident that “commits a tortious injury in this state caused by an act or omission outside this state” if it regularly does business in Georgia or “derives substantial revenue from goods used or consumed” here (O.C.G.A. § 9-10-91(3)), subject to federal due process limits. When the overseas maker is hard to reach, other companies in the distribution chain may also be sued, though not on a strict liability theory.
Two routes to jurisdiction
| Route | What it requires | Source |
|---|---|---|
| Specific jurisdiction under the Long Arm Statute | A claim "arising from" one of the acts listed in § 9-10-91, such as transacting business in Georgia, committing a tort in Georgia, or causing injury in Georgia by an out-of-state act while regularly doing business or deriving substantial revenue from goods used here | § 9-10-91 |
| General jurisdiction by registration | The company is "authorized to do or transact business in this state at the time a claim or cause of action arises" | Allstate Insurance Co. v. Klein (1992), reaffirmed in Cooper Tire & Rubber Co. v. McCall (2021) |
The registration route depends on the company having registered to do business in Georgia. A manufacturer based overseas that never registered here is reached, if at all, through the Long Arm Statute.
The registration rule after McCall and Mallory
In Cooper Tire & Rubber Co. v. McCall (2021), a Florida resident hurt when a tire’s tread separated on a Florida roadway sued the tire maker, a Delaware corporation based in Ohio, in Gwinnett County along with a Georgia driver and dealership. The Supreme Court of Georgia declined to overrule Klein and held that general jurisdiction based on the company’s authorization to do business in Georgia did not violate federal due process under Pennsylvania Fire Insurance Co. v. Gold Issue Mining & Milling Co. (1917), “a decision that the Supreme Court has not overruled”. Two years later, in Mallory v. Norfolk Southern Railway Co. (2023), the United States Supreme Court upheld Pennsylvania’s similar rule requiring registered out-of-state companies to agree to suit there “on ‘any cause of action'”.
The Long Arm route for overseas makers
For a company that sells into Georgia through distributors, § 9-10-91(3) asks whether it “regularly does or solicits business, or engages in any other persistent course of conduct, or derives substantial revenue from goods used or consumed or services rendered in this state”. Federal due process then asks whether the company’s own contacts with Georgia make suit here fair. Evidence of Georgia sales volume, Georgia dealers, marketing aimed at Georgia, and warranty service in the state is what answers both questions. Where the claim is filed is covered in where you can sue an out-of-state defendant in Georgia.
Service abroad
Even with jurisdiction, the company must be served by a method valid for the country where it is located, which for treaty countries means the procedures of the Hague Service Convention. Service abroad follows its own procedures and timing, which matter when the two-year filing deadline is close.
Other defendants in the chain
A U.S. importer, distributor, or retailer can be served without service abroad, but Georgia limits strict liability to manufacturers: a “product seller is not a manufacturer … and is not liable as such” (§ 51-1-11.1(b)). Claims against those companies have to rest on their own negligence or on a warranty; see whether you can sue the store or only the manufacturer. An importer that actually designed or made the product may be a manufacturer rather than a product seller.
Questions to answer early
- Who designed and made the product, and where is that company located?
- Is that company, or a U.S. subsidiary, registered to do business in Georgia?
- How did the product reach Georgia, and through which companies?
- How long will service in the manufacturer’s country take compared with the filing deadline?
Sources
- O.C.G.A. §§ 9-10-91, 51-1-11.1 (text as published in October 2016 on a mirror site; no amendment recorded in the 2022 to 2026 legislative summaries).
- Cooper Tire & Rubber Co. v. McCall, 312 Ga. 422 (2021)
- Mallory v. Norfolk Southern Railway Co. (U.S. 2023), Cornell Legal Information Institute
General information about Georgia law as of October 2026. It is not legal advice, and reading it does not create an attorney-client relationship.