The salesmen were residents of that state and they met with prospective customers in motels and hotels, and occasionally rented space to put up displays.

International Shoe's solicitation system allegedly was set up explicitly to avoid establishing the situs of the business in other states insofar as the salesmen did not have offices, did not negotiate prices, and sent all orders back to Missouri; shipments from the plant to customers were sent f.o.b.

International Shoe Co. did not pay the tax at issue in this case, so the state effected service of process on one of their salesmen with a notice of assessment.

International Shoe made a special appearance before the office of unemployment to dispute the state's jurisdiction over it as a corporate "person."

§ 1606(a) (providing that no person shall be relieved from compliance with a state law requiring payments to an unemployment fund on the ground that he is engaged in interstate commerce) the fact that the corporation is engaged in interstate commerce does not relieve it from liability for payments to the state unemployment compensation fund.

But now that the capias ad respondendum has given way to personal service of summons or other form of notice, due process requires only that, in order to subject a defendant to a judgment in personam, if he be not present within the territory of the forum, he have certain minimum contacts with it such that the maintenance of the suit does not offend traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice.

Justice Hugo Black wrote a separate opinion, agreeing with the outcome in this case, but contending that the Court has excessively restricted the power of states to find jurisdiction over companies doing business therein.

A growing body of Supreme Court precedent and incremental statutory and common law doctrines related to personal jurisdiction had been evolving over a period of several decades from the late 19th century through the early 20th century, and the Supreme Court therefore could have upheld jurisdiction over defendant corporation.

This case changed that to some extent, though the "traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice" are drawn from the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.