Minimum Contacts and Modern Specific Personal Jurisdiction

Kane Corp., a U.S. company headquartered in State A and incorporated in State D, manufactures and markets a variety of products made from high-tech fibers. Among these products is a surgical gown for doctors that Kane advertises as providing the “highest level of protection from infectious diseases.” For many years, Kane has sold large quantities of these gowns directly to four different states’ bio-containment centers, which treat patients with infectious diseases. State B is one of those states. Kane sources all its fabric for these gowns from a supplier in Foreign Country called Foreign-tel. Foreign-tel supplies many other companies with its fabric in other products, and it keeps track of where all its materials end up. The popularity of Kane’s gowns in State B is a main reason Foreign-tel continues to supply Kane with its fabric. A group of State B bio-containment center doctors who wear Kane’s gowns as a result of Kane’s direct sales to the state became infected with a dangerous virus. They brought a products liability suit against Kane and Foreign-tel in State B state court. Are Kane and Foreign-tel subject to personal jurisdiction in State B?

(B)Kane would be subject to personal jurisdiction in State B because of its direct sales there, and Foreign-tel would be subject to personal jurisdiction in State B because of Foreign-tel’s knowledge and expectations after delivering the fabric into the stream of commerce through Kane Corp.

Hardware Company (HC) is a high-tech home product retailer. HC’s operations are in State M, and it is incorporated there. HC also maintains a retail sales website with national reach. One of HC's best-selling products is a snow-melting stair mat. As a result of aggressive marketing aimed at State M and State N, HC sells an unusually high number of mats in those two states. A State M resident bought an HC mat at one of HC’s State M retail outlets. After deciding to move to warmer climates, the State M resident resold the mat to a hardware store in State Z on the drive to his new home. The store sold the mat to State Z resident Plaintiff. Plaintiff was severely burned at his State Z home when the mat’s electrical components malfunctioned. Plaintiff sued HC for product liability in a State N state court, hoping to take advantage of favorable product liability laws there. Can State N exercise general jurisdiction over HC?

 (D) No, because HC is not a citizen of State N.

Traveler, lifelong resident of StateA, went to State B for a convention. 1 night, he tasted a local Cajun whiskey. He bought a case of the whiskey to take back to StateA. Upon his return to StateA, Traveler gave a bottle to his boss, Boss, a citizen of StateA. After work that evening, Boss decided to try the whiskey and prepared himself a cocktail consisting of the Cajun whiskey and water. After three or four sips of his cocktail, Boss experienced a severe burning sensation in his throat and stomach. He called his doctor, who advised him to come to the hospital and bring the bottle of the whiskey with him. At the hospital, it was determined that the bottle contained a high percentage of acid. Boss was treated accordingly. Cajun whiskey is a product distilled by the Whiskey Company, a State B corporation with its principal place of business in State B. It distributes its products in State B, State C, and State D. Whiskey Company places ads in B magazine at all local hotels, including the one where Traveler stayed during his visit. About 5% of all sales of the Cajun whiskey are made to State A tourists who take the product back to their home state. State A’s long-arm statute states: “The courts of this state shall have personal jurisdiction over an individual, corporation or other entity who, in person or through an agent: transacts business within the state; or commits a tortious act without the state causing injury within the state; or is personally served within the state; or owns property within the state.”Can a state court in State A exercise jurisdiction over Whiskey Company?

(C) No, because it did not commit a tortious act in State A.

Traveler, a lifelong resident of State A, went to State B for a convention. One night, he tasted a local Cajun whiskey. He bought a case of the whiskey to take back to State A. Upon his return to State A, Traveler gave a bottle to his boss, a citizen of State Z. After work that evening, Boss decided to try the whiskey and prepared himself a cocktail consisting of the Cajun whiskey and water. After three or four sips of his cocktail, Boss experienced a severe burning sensation in his throat and stomach. He called his doctor, who advised him to come to the hospital and bring the bottle of the whiskey with him. At the hospital it was determined that the bottle contained a high percentage of acid. Boss was treated accordingly. Cajun whiskey is a product distilled by the Whiskey Company, a State B corporation with its principal place of business in State Z. It distributes its products in State B, State C, and State D. Whiskey Company places ads in B magazine at all local hotels, including the one where Traveler stayed during his visit. Commercials for Cajun Whiskey appear on State A local stations during several commercial holidays. About 35% of all sales of the Cajun whiskey are made to State A tourists who take the product back to their home state. State Z’s long-arm statute states: “The courts of this state shall have personal jurisdiction over an individual, corporation or other entity who, in person or through an agent: transacts business within the state; or commits a tortious act without the state causing injury within the state; or is personally served within the state; or owns property within the state.” Can a state court in State Z exercise jurisdiction over Whiskey Company?

(D)Yes, because Whiskey Company is a citizen of State Z.