Legal Opinion

Scoggins v. Scoggins

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided March 13, 1989No. 73PublishedCited by 27 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

KELLY, Judge:

In this opinion, we are called upon to determine whether an assertion of “marital domicile” by itself alleges sufficient minimum contacts, pursuant to the Pennsylvania Long-Arm Statute, to withstand a preliminary objection asserting the absence of in personam jurisdiction over a nonresident, nondomiciliary defendant in an action brought by a resident spouse concerning economic claims arising out of the marital relationship.

We find that although “marital domicile” may provide sufficient minimum contacts with Pennsylvania to permit exercise of in personam jurisdiction, the bare…

2Cases cited37 opinions

  1. International Shoe Co. v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1945
  2. Mullane v. Central Hanover Bank & Trust Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1950
  3. Hanson v. DencklaSupreme Court of the United States · 1958
  4. Gulf Oil Corp. v. GilbertSupreme Court of the United States · 1947
  5. Pennoyer v. NeffSupreme Court of the United States · 1878

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

3Cited by27 opinions

  1. King v. Detroit Tool Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1996
  2. Mendel v. WilliamsSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2012
  3. Nutrition Management Services Co. v. HinchcliffSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2007
  4. Hickman v. TL Transp., LLCDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2018
  5. Taylor v. Fedra International, Ltd.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2003

22 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