Caesars Riverboat Casino, LLC v. Beach
2011 Ky. LEXIS 38
| Ky. | 2011Background
- Caesars Riverboat Casino, LLC and Harrah's Entertainment, Inc. operate a casino boat near Louisville with no Kentucky offices.
- The incident and alleged negligence occurred in Indiana; plaintiff Carla Beach, a Kentucky resident, sues in Shelby Circuit Court.
- Shelby Circuit Court dismissed for lack of personal jurisdiction; Court of Appeals reversed and held jurisdiction proper.
- Appellants have extensive Kentucky advertising, direct mail, promotions, and civic activities; about 50% of revenue from Kentucky residents.
- Kentucky Supreme Court applies a two-step analysis: first under KRS 454.210 to see if the claim arises from enumerated activity; second, if applicable, whether due process is offended.
- Court concludes Beach's claim does not arise from Appellants' Kentucky activities, so personal jurisdiction is not permitted under KRS 454.210.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether KRS 454.210 permits jurisdiction for this out-of-state tort. | Beach argues the statute applies due to substantial Kentucky contacts. | Caesars/Harrah's contend the claim must arise from enumerated Kentucky acts. | No; claim does not arise from enumerated acts. |
| Whether Beach's claim 'arises from' Appellants' Kentucky transactions. | Beatch view: Kentucky ads and promotions caused her presence and injury. | No direct nexus between Kentucky activities and Indiana injury. | Arising-from requirement not met. |
| Whether, if the statute applies, due process is violated by asserting jurisdiction. | If statute applies, due process may be satisfied due to contacts. | Even if statute applies, Beach's claim fails the arising-from link, so due process need not be reached. | Not reached; statute fails. |
Key Cases Cited
- Wilson v. Case, 85 S.W.3d 589 (Ky.2002) (analysis cautions merging statute with due process)
- Cummings v. Pitman, 239 S.W.3d 77 (Ky.2007) (statute may reach outer limits of due process but not beyond statutory language)
- Mohler v. Dorado Wings, Inc., 675 S.W.2d 404 (Ky.App.1984) (long-arm scope coextensive with due process, within statutory language)
- Davis H. Elliot Co., Inc. v. Caribbean Utilities Co., Ltd., 513 F.2d 1176 (6th Cir.1975) (limits of statutory jurisdiction coextensive with due process)
- First Nat'l Bank of Louisville v. Bezema, 569 F. Supp. 818 (S.D. Ind.1983) (two-step jurisdiction approach; statute and due process)
- Ford v. RDI/Caesars Riverboat Casino, LLC, 503 F. Supp. 2d 839 (W.D.Ky.2007) (federal district court decision cited)