336 S.W.3d 891
Ky.2011Background
- Robey's Pawn World, Missouri seller; Hinners, Kentucky buyer, contracted via eBay for a 2002 Cadillac Escalade.
- Hinners won the auction and traveled to Missouri to complete the purchase; vehicle was titled in Kentucky.
- Robey allegedly represented the vehicle as undamaged and provided a one-month/1,000-mile warranty; price was renegotiated to $23,000.
- Post-purchase, the car exhibited extensive prior damage; repairs were required and warranty concerns arose; Hinners failed to obtain remediation from Robey.
- Hinners sued Robey in Kenton Circuit Court for fraud and breach of warranty; Robey moved to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction; trial court entered default against Robey.
- Court of Appeals reversed; Kentucky Supreme Court granted review to address in personam jurisdiction and Internet transactions.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether KRS 454.210(2)(a)(2) authorizes long-arm jurisdiction over Robey. | Hinners argues Robey contracted to supply goods in Kentucky. | Robey contends no long-arm jurisdiction under the statute applies to a single online sale. | Yes under 454.210(2)(a)(2). |
| Whether due process limits defeat long-arm jurisdiction after 454.210 analysis. | Hinners asserts due process permits jurisdiction given contract and in-state consequences. | Robey argues due process bars jurisdiction for a single Internet sale. | No due process; jurisdiction not permissible for this transaction. |
| Whether a single eBay sale constitutes sufficient minimum contacts for jurisdiction. | Hinners contends the contract to supply goods/warranty arising in Kentucky creates contacts. | Robey maintains a lone, out-of-state sale is random/fortuitous and insufficient. | Not sufficient; single Internet sale does not establish minimum contacts. |
Key Cases Cited
- Caesars Riverboat Casino, LLC v. Beach, 336 S.W.3d 51 (Ky.2011) (two-step long-arm analysis; not subsuming statutory and due process)
- Mohasco Indus., Inc. v. Southern Mach. Co., 401 F.2d 374 (6th Cir.1968) (three-prong Mohasco test for limited jurisdiction in single-act cases)
- Burger King Corp. v. Rudzewicz, 471 U.S. 462 (U.S.1985) (purposeful availment and fair play concepts in in personam jurisdiction)
- International Shoe Co. v. Washington, 326 U.S. 310 (U.S.1945) (minimum contacts and traditional notions of fair play)
- World-Wide Volkswagen Corp. v. Woodson, 444 U.S. 286 (U.S.1980) (foreseeability and due process in jurisdictional limits)
- Zippo Mfg. Co. v. Zippo Dot Com, 952 F. Supp. 1119 (W.D. Pa.1997) (interactive vs. passive Internet websites in PJ analysis)
- Keeton v. Hustler Magazine, Inc., 465 U.S. 770 (U.S.1984) (purposeful availment and forum state connections)
- Boschetto v. Hansing, 539 F.3d 1011 (9th Cir.2008) (single-item Internet sale not jurisdictionally sufficient)