Laykin v. McFall
Texas Court of Appeals, 7th District (Amarillo)
1DissentPoff, Justice
I find Sol W. Laykin (Sol) is amenable to the jurisdiction of the Texas courts under Tex.Civ.Prac. & Rem.Code Ann. § 17.042(2) (Vernon 1986), and I further find the exercise of this jurisdiction to be consistent with due process under the 14th Amendment to the United States Constitution. Therefore, I must respectfully dissent.
Under the general Texas long-arm statute, section 17.042, Jane Livermore (Jane) *272had the initial burden of making a prima facie case by pleading sufficient allegations to bring Sol within the provisions of the statute. McKanna v. Edgar, 388 S.W.2d 927 (Tex.1965). Jane…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Burger King Corp. v. RudzewiczSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
- Calder v. JonesSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Keeton v. Hustler Magazine, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Guardian Royal Exchange Assurance, Ltd. v. English China Clays, P.L.C.Texas Supreme Court · 1991
- Schlobohm v. SchapiroTexas Supreme Court · 1990
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.