At the opposite end are situations where a defendant has simply posted information on an Internet Web site which is accessible to users in foreign jurisdictions. Acceptance of the application created a continuing obligation between the defendant and the plaintiff.
According to Robey, this renegotiation resulted in the elimination of the warranty, and one of the transactional documents in the record indicates the vehicle was being sold "as is-no warranty. In such circumstances, "the motion shall be treated as one for summary judgment and disposed of as provided in Rule This test reads as follows: The era of eBay has opened the door to opportunities for a new kind of fraud and commercial piracy as well as having created the more positive potential for vastly expanded commercial exchanges.
Supp at ; see also, e. The test is stated as follows: The first prong of the test asks whether the defendant purposefully availed himself of the privilege of acting within the forum state or causing a consequence in the forum state.
Therefore, I would affirm the trial court in its award of damages in this case. A comparison of the second prong of the test with the first prong discloses that there is a lack of parallelism between the two.
The second prong considers whether the cause of action arises from the alleged in-state activities. The email correspondence between the parties relating to the single purchase was initiated by appellant. Whereas the first prong is met if the defendant purposefully avails himself of the privilege either of acting within, or causing a consequence in the forum state, the second prong, as stated in Mohasco and Wilson, refers only to the acting within the forum state provision of prong one, to the exclusion of the causing a consequence provision.
A void judgment is a legal nullity, and a court has no discretion in determining whether it should be set aside. Not surprisingly, forum state jurisdiction has been considered in other cases involving a single contract between a resident buyer and a nonresident seller, albeit in other contexts.
Life Savings and Loan, F. The term "consequence" is here used in its normal sense, meaning: The trial court never resolved this factual dispute, and for purposes of our review, we shall presume the existence of the warranty described in the eBay listing.
Therefore, we conclude that this transaction meets the requirements for long-arm jurisdiction under KRS Sellers cannot expect to avail themselves of the benefits of the internet-created world market that they purposefully exploit and profit from without accepting the concomitant legal responsibilities that such an expanded market may bring with it.
When Hinners took possession of the vehicle, Robey again assured him that the vehicle had never been damaged. That, however, is insufficient to overcome the basic principles as discussed above.
Supreme Court held that the formation of a contract with a nonresident defendant was not, standing alone, sufficient to create jurisdiction. Ebay is a widely-used auction site on the Internet.
The warranty provision between Robey and Hinners does not alter our view. While it is arguable that the defendant may have foreseen the possibility that a New Hampshire resident might bid on the excavator, foreseeability alone is insufficient to support the exercise of personal jurisdiction under the Federal Due Process Clause.
A different view was expressed in Dedvukaj v. Hinners asserts that the court had personal jurisdiction over Robey under the Kentucky long-arm statute, KRS There is some indication in the record that delivery and execution of the paperwork may have occurred in Illinois; however, the relevant point is that delivery was completed beyond the borders of Kentucky, and whether it was in Missouri or in Illinois is of no significance.
While Internet commerce is, relatively speaking, a new method of transacting commercial activity, nevertheless, traditional federal due process standards remain applicable to the review process: In accordance with the conditions of the auction, Hinners traveled to Missouri 3 to complete the transaction and take possession of the vehicle.
On or about September 15,Robey listed a Cadillac Escalade automobile for auction on eBay Motors, a division of the eBay auction site. Nevertheless, the first prong of the Mohasco test may also be satisfied if a defendant has purposefully availed himself of the privilege of causing a consequence in the forum state.
Mitchell, KY, for Appellee. Hinners took the vehicle to a mechanic for inspection, and was told that the vehicle had suffered extensive prior damage; that almost every panel on the vehicle had been damaged and had been either replaced or filled with body putty; that the vehicle had been completely repainted; and that the front doors and glass had been replaced.
The court interpreted such eBay transactions in this manner: Burger King, U. The middle ground is occupied by interactive Web sites where a user can exchange information with the host computer.
March 24, Richard E.ROBEY (BRAD) VS. HINNERS (GERALD S.) if any, caused by the defendant.” In his brief, Robey argues that the facts do not support personal jurisdiction over him because the first prong (“purposeful availment”) of the threeprong test explained in the Wilson case is missing.
Further, Robey argues that Hinners’s cause of action is more. Robey v. Hinners CA 05/29/ WL Opinion by Senior Judge Buckingham; Judge Acree concurred; Chief. Court of Appeals of the State of Kentucky,May 29, ,The opinion of the court was delivered by: Buckingham, Senior Judge,Brief For Appellant: David M.
Andrew Robert L. Dawson Fort Mitchell, Kentucky.,BRAD ROBEY, D/B/A ROBEY'S PAWN WORLD APPELLANT v. GERALD S. HINNERS APPELLEE. Case opinion for KY Supreme Court HINNERS v. ROBEY. Read the Court's full decision on FindLaw.
POINT OF VIEW ONLINE 1 Robey v. Superior Court () 56 Cal.4th Issue If officers have probable cause to believe that a package in their possession contains evidence of a crime, does the mobility of the package constitute an exigent circumstance. Opinion of the Court by Justice VENTERS.
Appellant, Gerald S. Hinners, a Kentucky resident, appeals from an opinion of the Court of Appeals determining that Appellee, Brad Robey, a Missouri resident, is not subject to personal jurisdiction in Kenton Circuit Court.
Hinners sued Robey over the.Download