Williams v. Lakeview Co.
Arizona Supreme Court
1DissentZlaket, Chief Justice
¶ 20 I believe the court of appeals’ opinion is correct and would not disturb it.
I
¶ 21 The majority’s analysis too narrowly relies on causal nexus as the linchpin of specific jurisdiction. Such a strict approach invites absurd and unjust results. Consider this hypothetical: Suppose another Arizona resident was intentionally or negligently overserved with alcohol by the defendant’s casino on the day of the accident. After crossing the border to go home, this person was also involved in a collision and sustained serious injuries. Unlike the plaintiffs, however, he claims to have been drawn to…
2Cases cited23 opinions
- Burger King Corp. v. RudzewiczSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
- World-Wide Volkswagen Corp. v. WoodsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
- Helicopteros Nacionales De Colombia, S. A. v. HallSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Shaffer v. HeitnerSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
- Ticketmaster-New York, Inc. v. Joseph M. AliotoCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1994
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.