Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

ABC Drilling Co., Inc. v. Hughes Group

Supreme Court of Oklahoma

Decided March 18, 1980No. 52050Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partOpala, Justice

At issue is the correctness of the trial court’s refusal to vacate a default judgment in § 1031 proceedings.1 The judgment under challenge was against an Arizona corporation — unlicensed in this state. Its suability in Oklahoma for the liability sought to be imposed was predicated on a single transaction alleged to have the constitutionally requisite “minimum contacts” with the state. Our opinion condemns as falling short of the fundamental law’s mandate both our statute 2 and the process pursuant to which the foreign defendant was haled *770into court. While I fully concur in this appraisal of…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. Hansberry v. LeeSupreme Court of the United States · 1940
  2. Perdue v. ShermanNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1976
  3. State ex rel. Cronkhite v. BeldenWisconsin Supreme Court · 1927
  4. Conwill v. EldridgeSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1918
  5. Stevens Expert Cleaners & Dyers, Inc. v. StevensSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1954

12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API