Legal Opinion
Anilas, Inc. v. Kern
Ohio Supreme Court
Decided July 8, 1987No. 86-152PublishedCited by 14 opinions
1Per curiam
The issue to be determined is whether Elvira Kern established sufficient minimum contacts with the state of Kansas to render her amenable to the in personam jurisdiction of Kansas courts. The facts presented show that she did. We therefore reverse the determination of the court of appeals.
It is well-established that “* * * due process requires only that in order to subject a defendant to a judgment in personam, if he be not present within the territory of the forum, he have certain minimum contacts with it such that the maintenance of the suit does not offend ‘traditional notions of fair play…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- International Shoe Co. v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1945
- Burger King Corp. v. RudzewiczSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
- World-Wide Volkswagen Corp. v. WoodsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
- Hanson v. DencklaSupreme Court of the United States · 1958
- Shaffer v. HeitnerSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
3Cited by14 opinions
- Compuserve, Inc. v. TrionfoOhio Court of Appeals · 1993
- Friedman v. Speiser, Krause & Madole, P.C.Ohio Court of Appeals · 1988
- Wright International Express, Inc. v. Roger Dean Chevrolet, Inc.District Court, S.D. Ohio · 1988
- Reliance Electric Co. v. LueckeDistrict Court, S.D. Ohio · 1988
- Ucker v. TaylorOhio Court of Appeals · 1991
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.