Legal Opinion · Dissent

CSR, Ltd. v. Taylor

Court of Appeals of Maryland

Decided November 16, 2009No. 129, September Term, 2008Published

1Dissent

Dissenting Opinion by

MURPHY, J.,

which BELL, C. J., and RAKER, J., join.

I do not agree with the majority’s holding “that the Court of Special Appeals erred in concluding that [Petitioner] had sufficient minimum contacts with the State of Maryland to support the Circuit Court’s exercise of personal jurisdiction.” In Taylor v. CSR, 181 Md.App. 363, 956 A.2d 754 (2008), the Court of Special Appeals stated:

Taylor presented evidence that the cause of action arose from CSR’s direct shipment of asbestos to the Port of Baltimore, where Smith and Anzulis were stevedores, and expert testimony that CSR…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. World-Wide Volkswagen Corp. v. WoodsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
  2. Asahi Metal Industry Co. v. Superior Court of Cal., Solano Cty.Supreme Court of the United States · 1987
  3. CSR LTD. v. LinkTexas Supreme Court · 1996
  4. W.R. Grace & Co. v. CSR Ltd.Appellate Court of Illinois · 1996
  5. State Ex Rel. CSR Ltd. v. MacQueenWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1994

2 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