Civil Procedure Keyed to Coundback
0 of 3 questions completed
You have already completed the quiz before. Hence you can not start it again.
Quiz is loading…
You must sign in or sign up to start the quiz.
You have to pass the previous Module’s quiz in order to start this quiz:
you have successfully completed the quiz.
Adam and Bill, citizens of State Z, are plaintiffs in an action brought in the United States District Court in State X against Parco, a State Y corporation, and Buyco, a State X corporation. Parco’s office and plant are located in State Y. At no time has Parco had an office or salesmen in State X. Buyco’s sole place of business is in State X.
The complaint alleges that each of the plaintiffs’ sustained serious personal injuries when a blade broke on an electric lawn mower while a clerk in Buyco’s store in State X was demonstrating the equipment. Each plaintiff requested damages in the sum of $80,000. The mower had been manufactured by Parco and shipped to Rob in State Z. Rob had a contract with Parco to act as exclusive distributor of Parco products in eleven states, including States X and Z.
Process was served personally on the president of Parco at Parco’s office in State Y and on the president of Buyco at its office in State X. Thereafter the following occurred:
1. Parco moved to dismiss the action on the ground that the court had no jurisdiction over it.
2. Parco filed a cross-claim against Buyco for $12,000 alleged to be due for merchandise previously sold by Parco to Buyco.
3. Buyco filed a counterclaim against Adam for $74,000 alleged to be due for merchandise previously sold to Adam.
The U.S. District Court can assert personal jurisdiction over Parco if:Grading can be reviewed and adjusted.Grading can be reviewed and adjusted.
Dodo is a State X partnership composed of Jim Do and Bob Do. They manufacture and lease large ovens that are used in restaurants. Dodo’s only plant and business office is in State X. Three months ago, the president of Dominic’s (a fashionable eating spot in State Z) made a trip to State X and leased an oven from Dodo. Dominic’s is incorporated in State Z, where its restaurant is located. The stock of Dominic’s is held by Carl, Fred and Alice. The Do brothers are domiciled in State X. Two weeks ago, Paul (an employee of Dominic’s) was hurt when the “door” of the leased oven suddenly fell open upon him. Paul sued both Dodo and Dominic’s in the U.S. District Court in State Z. Jim and Bob Do were personally served in State X. Dominic’s was served pursuant to a State Z statute which permits notice of the lawsuit to be (1) left with someone of “suitable discretion” at the defendant’s home or main business premises, or (2) if no such person is available, posted on the door which is most often used by the occupants of the defendant’s home or main business premises. Paul’s process server utilized the latter method. The president of Dominic’s saw the notice and delivered the summons and service of process to the corporation’s attorneys.
In determining if the assertion of personal jurisdiction over Dodo is proper, what factors are pertinent?Grading can be reviewed and adjusted.Grading can be reviewed and adjusted.
Kalinda filed suit in January of 2011 in the U.S .District Court of Massachusetts in Boston against BadBoys Corporation and Hansoff, BadBoys’ President. Kalinda claimed in her complaint that several male BadBoys co-workers and Hansoff (who lived and worked in Kazakhstan) sent her many inappropriate and offensive emails in October, November and December of 2010. During the lawsuit, several motions were presented to the Court based on the following facts:
Kalinda attempted, through a proper Process Server, to serve the Complaint and Summons in February 2011 at Hansoff’s Massachusetts Penthouse he leased throughout the year from the Four Seasons Hotel. One of Hansoff’s several friends who hung out at the Penthouse accepted the papers. Hansoff argued that he lived in Kazakhstan, and only kept the Penthouse in Boston leased throughout the year so he could stay there whenever he came to visit BadBoys’ Boston Headquarters. Hansoff claims he is in Boston at most two weeks out of the year, and not even continuously for two weeks. Also, Hansoff claimed he has no idea who the person was who accepted the papers, because “many people come and go from the Penthouse” and he doesn’t know who every one of them are.
Hansoff has moved to dismiss Plaintiff Kalinda’s complaint based on improper service of Process. Should the Court grant or deny Hansoff’s motion to dismiss?Grading can be reviewed and adjusted.Grading can be reviewed and adjusted.