Legal Opinion
Bandemer v. Ford Motor Co.
Court of Appeals of Minnesota
Decided April 23, 2018No. A17-1182PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
REYES, Judge *713In this appeal from the district court's denial of appellant Ford Motor Company's (Ford) motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction, Ford argues that Minnesota does not have specific personal jurisdiction over it because respondent Adam Bandemer's injury did not arise from Ford's contacts with Minnesota. We affirm.
FACTS
Bandemer, a Minnesota resident, sustained a brain injury in Minnesota while riding in the front passenger seat of a 1994 Ford Crown Victoria (the Crown Victoria) in January 2015. The Crown Victoria was registered in Minnesota. Co-defendant Eric Hanson, who was…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- International Shoe Co. v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1945
- Daimler AG v. BaumanSupreme Court of the United States · 2014
- Walden v. FioreSupreme Court of the United States · 2014
- Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. Superior Court of Cal., San Francisco Cty.Supreme Court of the United States · 2017
- Hardrives, Inc. v. City of LaCrosse, Wis.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1976
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Ford Motor Co. v. Mont. Eighth Judicial Dist. CourtMontana Supreme Court · 2019
- Bandemer v. Ford Motor Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 2019
- Bandemer v. Ford Motor Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 2019
- FRANCESKI v. FREEDOM MORTGAGE CORPORATIONDistrict Court, D. New Jersey · 2021
- FRANCESKI v. FREEDOM MORTGAGE CORPORATIONDistrict Court, E.D. Virginia · 2021