Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Podcasts Blogs -> InternetCases.com
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense
Find a Local Lawyer
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402
Podcasts
: InternetCases.comInternet transactions support exercise of personal jurisdiction over out of state cigarette seller

- Image via Wikipedia
Illinois v. Hemi Group LLC, — F.3d —, 2010 WL 3547647 (7th Cir. September 14, 2010)
Seventh Circuit declines once again to adopt the Zippo test for personal jurisdiction in internet cases.
The State of Illinois filed a civil suit in federal court in Illinois against a New Mexico-based online cigarette seller. The trial court denied the defendant’s motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction. The defendant sought review with the Seventh Circuit. On appeal, the court affirmed the denial of the motion, holding that the defendant’s website satisfied the minimum contacts requirement for the exercise of personal jurisdiction.
The mechanics of the website were important in the minimum contacts analysis. The site expressly said that the company would sell to consumers in any state except those in New York. The court interpreted this to relate to the personal jurisdiction question in two ways. First, such a statement implicitly said that the defendant would do business in Illinois. Second, it revealed that the defendant knew that it could be subject to the jurisdiction of out-of-state courts (i.e., New York) and also knew how to prevent such an exercise (by not selling there).
In this analysis, the court expressly declined to adopt the well-known Zippo sliding scale test, which evaluates the interactivity of a website in the personal jurisdiction analysis.
Restating a hesitancy “to fashion a special jurisdictional test for Internet-based cases,” the court applied the traditional constitutional approach of the “effects test” found in Calder v. Jones. It made the interesting observation, as it did in Jennings v. AC Hydraulic A/S, that “although technological advances may alter the analysis of personal jurisdiction, those advances may not eviscerate the constitutional limits on a state’s power to exercise jurisdiction over nonresident defendants.”
Related articles by Zemanta
- Creation of False Blog and LinkedIn Account Targeting Utah Resident Supports Personal Jurisdiction in Utah — Buckles v. Brides Club, Inc. (ericgoldman.org)
Full post as published by InternetCases.com on September 15, 2010 (boomark / email).
Selection of State Supreme Court Judges
How State Court Judges are Selected
Child Support Survival Guide
The Child Support Enforcement System
Vioxx Lawsuits
Vioxx personal injury suits are a seroius concern for Merck and patietns
Construction Site Accidents
Lawsuits related to accidents
Child Support Overview
Federal requires states to set guidelines for support.
Child Support Orders
How to modify terms
Internet/Technology
involving cyber law, consumer protection, internet crime, internet fraud, online gambling, e-commerce.
Florida State Settles with Feds over Disclosure of Personal Driver Info
Florida State Settles with Feds over Disclosure of Personal Driver Info
Washington Car Accident
alleging liability for personal injuries caused by car, truck, bus, motorcycle or other vehicle accidents in Washington state.
Payment Card Transactions
TravelCenters to pay $5 million settlement in antitrust lawsuit.
Sperm Donor
Ordered to Pay Child Support
West Virginia Child Advocate Office Faces Class Action over Child Support
West Virginia Child Advocate Office Faces Class Action over Child Support

The latest on Internet-based jurisdiction
SC Supreme Court issues personal jurisdiction opinion
Internet Evidence (Part I: Authentication)
Personal Jurisdiction and the Internet
Sellers Exception Dismissal In Airplane Crash Product Liability Case Not Final And Appealable










