Saft America, Inc. v. Plainview Batteries, Inc.
Court of Appeals of North Carolina
1Concurring in part, dissenting in partArrowood, Judge
I concur with the majority holding insofar as it affirms the trial court’s denial of Defendant Energex’s motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction. However, I believe that personal jurisdiction is also properly exercised over Defendant Erde. Accordingly, I respectfully dissent from the majority’s reversal of the court’s denial of Erde’s motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction.
The dispositive issue is whether Erde had the requisite “minimum contacts” with North Carolina such that the exercise of personal jurisdiction over him does not violate his right to due process…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Hanson v. DencklaSupreme Court of the United States · 1958
- Calder v. JonesSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Tom Togs, Inc. v. Ben Elias Industries Corp.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1986
- Dunn v. PateSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1993
- Cannon v. MillerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1985
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.