This preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.
Unformatted text preview: -no specific statutory basis for personal jurisdiction-defendants file for motion to dismiss b/c lack of personal jurisdiction-supreme court denies motion saying it could exercise personal jurisdiction b/c retain plaintiff to represent them in oregon action were purposeful 1. What series of events led to the litigation in this case?-plaintiff resigns from the case and attempts to claim the money he feels he earned from his work before he resigned-defendant motions for dismissal and is denied 2. What is meant by long arm jurisdiction? Why does the plaintiff believe that he should be able to sue the defendant in a New York court?- 3. What arguments does the defendant raise to contest the plaintiffs claims? 4. Why does the court reach the conclusion that it does? Do you agree with the outcome, given the facts in this case?...
View Full Document
- Fall '07