Legal Opinion
Lorix v. Crompton Corp.
Court of Appeals of Minnesota
Decided June 2, 2004No. A03-1518PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
WILLIS, Judge.
On appeal from a district court order denying appellants’ motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction, appellants argue that the district court erroneously concluded that it could exercise personal jurisdiction over appellants. Because we conclude that respondent has not shown sufficient contacts for the exercise of either specific or general jurisdiction, we reverse.
FACTS
Respondent Diane Lorix’s amended class-action complaint alleges that appellants Flexsys NV and Flexsys America LP (collectively “Flexsys”) conspired with the other named defendants to fix the…
2Cases cited22 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
- Helicopteros Nacionales De Colombia, S. A. v. HallSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Merriman v. Crompton Corp.Supreme Court of Kansas · 2006
- C.H. Robinson Worldwide, Inc. v. FLS Transportation, Inc.Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 2009
- Bandemer v. Ford Motor Co.Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 2018
- Minnesota Public Radio v. Virginia Beach Educational Broadcasting Foundation, Inc.District Court, D. Minnesota · 2007