Legal Opinion
Carrigan v. California Horse Racing Board
Court of Appeals of Washington
Decided December 31, 1990No. 24401-9-IPublishedCited by 13 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtWinsor, J.
The California Horse Racing Board (CHRB) appeals an order denying its motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction. It contends the trial court erred in finding jurisdiction under RCW 4.28.185(1)(a) and (b), and in failing to rule that the exercise of jurisdiction in this case violates due process. We reverse the trial court and dismiss the action against CHRB.
In early 1989, Andrew Carrigan and John Love (hereinafter Respondents) purchased horses in California claiming races. CHRB then had in effect a rule providing that a horse acquired in a claiming race shall not "be eligible to…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Burger King Corp. v. RudzewiczSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
- Watson v. BuckSupreme Court of the United States · 1941
- Tyee Construction Co. v. Dulien Steel Products, Inc.Washington Supreme Court · 1963
- Saunders v. Lloyd's of LondonWashington Supreme Court · 1989
- Shute v. Carnival Cruise LinesWashington Supreme Court · 1989
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- Watson v. MaierCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1992
- University of Iowa Press v. UrreaCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1993
- Pruczinski v. AshbyWashington Supreme Court · 2016
- State v. LG Electronics, Inc.Court of Appeals of Washington · 2015
- Glover v. STATE OF ALASKA, DEPT. OF TRANSP.Court of Appeals of Washington · 2008
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.