ADVERTISEMENT



Google       

Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Legal Niches Blogs -> E-Commerce Law

OR PHONE (866) 635-1838 for Bankruptcy Help, (866) 635-6190 for Divorce,
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense

Find a Local Lawyer

Bankruptcy (866) 635-1838
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402

Bookmark

Legal Niches

: E-Commerce Law

Website Lauding Defendant's "Worldwide Expertise" and Facilitating One-Way Contact to the Defendant Too Passive to Confer Jurisdiction

ADVERTISEMENTS

Airplane

In Jensen v. Modern Aero, Inc., 2010 WL 88229 (Minn. App. Jan. 12, 2010), the Court of Appeals of Minnesota held that a defendant's website, which lauded defendant's "worldwide" expertise," listed a toll-free telephone number for defendant, and provided an electronic form for customers to contact the defendant, was insufficient to confer general personal jurisdiction over the defendant.  Accordingly, the Court affirmed the dismissal of negligence claims brought by the estate of a pilot who died in the crash of his small private airplane.

In rejecting Jensen's argument in favor of general jursidiction, the Court applied the reasoning articulated in Lakin v. Prudential Sec., Inc., 348 F.3d 704, 709 (8th Cir. 2003) in which the "critical question" is whether "a defendant's activity in the forum state is continuous and systematic."  "In Lakin, however, the Eighth Circuit observed that, in most cases the question of whether a website can create personal jurisdiction is pertinent to the issue of specific personal jurisdiction.  In determining wether a defendant's website satisfies the requirements of general personal jurisdiction, the Eighth Circuit first applied the test articulated in Zippo Mfg. Co. v. Zippo Dot Com, Inc., 952 F.Supp. 1119, 1124 (W.D. Pa. 1997), but also required contacts with the forum state through the website to be of a substantial quantity."  Jensen, 2010 WL 88229, at *2.

Noting that a passive website - one that "does little more than make information available to those who are interested in it" - cannot confer personal jursidiction, the Court found that the district court properly concluded that Modern Aero's website was "passive" and "at best . . . a worldwide website which allows customers to contact [Modern Aero's] sole facility in Colorado."  Accordingly, the Court agreed that Modern Aero's website was not sufficiently interactive to confer personal jurisdiction over Modern Aero under the Zippo test, as adopted in Lakin.

If you enjoyed this post, click here for ways you can have the latest content from E-Commerce Law delivered directly to your desktop or email account.

Full post as published by E-Commerce Law on January 24, 2010 (boomark / email).

Bloggers, promote your law blog by nominating your blog for inclusion in USLaw.com's Law Blog Directory and RSS Reader. Benefits described.
Related Law Articles

Lawsuits and Settlements

Related Searches

























































































































US Law
#1 Online Legal Resource













Your Blog Subscriptions
Subscribe to blogs

10,000+ Law Job Listings
Lawyer . Police . Paralegal . Etc
Earn a law-related degree
Are you the author of this blog? Adding USLaw.com to your Blogroll increases relevance. You qualify to display a USLaw Network badge.
Suggest changes to this blog's description or nominate another for inclusion. Register for updates.


Practice Area
Zip Code:

Contact a Lawyer Now!






0.0133 secs (new cache)