Legal Opinion
Ash v. Burnham Corp.
Court of Appeals of North Carolina
Decided May 6, 1986No. 8526SC1061PublishedCited by 18 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ARNOLD, Judge.
Determining whether foreign defendants may be subjected to in personam jurisdiction in this state involves a two-pronged test. First, the Court must determine whether jurisdiction is proper under the North Carolina “long-arm” statute, G.S. 1-75.4. Second, the Court must determine whether the exercise of jurisdiction violates due process of law. See Dillon v. Funding Corp., 291 N.C. 674, 231 S.E. 2d 629 (1977). Our Supreme Court has stated that the North Carolina “long-arm” statute provides for in personam jurisdiction to the full extent permitted by the United States…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- International Shoe Co. v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1945
- Helicopteros Nacionales De Colombia, S. A. v. HallSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Keeton v. Hustler Magazine, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Perkins v. Benguet Consolidated Mining Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1952
- Dillon v. Numismatic Funding Corp.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1977
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by18 opinions
- Birtha v. Stonemor, North Carolina, LLCCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2012
- Pan-American Products & Holdings, LLC v. R.T.G. Furniture Corp.District Court, M.D. North Carolina · 2011
- Wyatt v. Walt Disney World, Co.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 2002
- Brickman v. CodellaCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1986
- Regent Lighting Corp. v. American Lighting Concept, Inc.District Court, M.D. North Carolina · 1997
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.