Legal Opinion

Nasca v. Hull

Montana Supreme Court

Decided November 4, 2004No. 03-462PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Rice

¶1 Dave Hull, Don Ovitt, and Bill Buckner, d/b/a Quality Used Cars of Hamilton (“Appellants” or “Quality”), appeal from the judgment entered by the Twenty-First Judicial District Court, Ravalli County, which dismissed Appellants’ third-party complaint against John Blayden and the Herndon Insurance Agency, Inc., an Idaho Corporation (“Respondents”). We reverse and remand.

¶2 We rephrase the issue on appeal as follows:

¶3 Did the District Court err in dismissing Quality’s complaint on grounds that the exercise of specific personal jurisdiction over Respondents would violate due process?

FACTUAL…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Washington v. Confederated Bands & Tribes of the Yakima Indian NationSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
  2. Stratemeyer v. Lincoln CountyMontana Supreme Court · 1996
  3. Cimmaron Corp. v. SmithMontana Supreme Court · 2003
  4. Simmons Oil Corp. v. Holly Corp.Montana Supreme Court · 1990
  5. Threlkeld v. ColoradoMontana Supreme Court · 2000

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Tackett v. DuncanMontana Supreme Court · 2014
  2. Bunch v. Lancair International, Inc.Montana Supreme Court · 2009
  3. Gateway v. Philadelphia IndemnityMontana Supreme Court · 2020
  4. Bucy v. Edward Jones & Co.Montana Supreme Court · 2019
  5. Weimar v. BarrettMontana Supreme Court · 2009

1 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