Starbrite Distributing, Inc. v. Excelda Manufacturing Co.

(concurring in .part and dissenting in part). While I concur with part n of the majority’s opinion, I write separately to dissent from part m because I disagree with the majority’s conclusion that defendant had sufficient minimum contacts with Michigan to support an assertion of limited personal jurisdiction. Instead, in this case, I would affirm the decision of the Court of Appeals, which held that an exercise of limited personal jurisdiction in this instance would constitute a violation of the Due Process Clause.

The majority correctly finds that the initial step in this personal…