3 N.E.3d 12
Ind. Ct. App.2014Background
- Dr. Brar, Indiana resident, sued Wolf’s Marine, Inc., a Michigan business, for boat storage damages.
- Wolf’s stored Brar’s boat in Benton Harbor, Michigan, after Leonard, Brar’s agent, arranged storage via Wolf’s from Indiana.
- Contract for 2010-11 and 2011-12 storage was entered via Leonard in Indiana; no forum-selection clause.
- Payment for services was sent from Indiana; no physical Wolf’s presence or employees in Indiana.
- Brar alleged the damage occurred during storage in Michigan; contract performance largely occurred in Michigan.
- Indiana trial court held personal jurisdiction; Wolf’s petitioned for interlocutory appeal and dismissal, which this court reviews de novo.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Indiana may exercise specific personal jurisdiction over Wolf’s | Brar asserts Wolf’s sufficient Indiana contacts via contract formation and advertising | Wolf’s argues no purposeful availment; contacts are insufficient for specific jurisdiction | Not sufficient; no purposeful availment; no specific jurisdiction |
Key Cases Cited
- Burger King Corp. v. Rudzewicz, 471 U.S. 462 (1985) (contract alone cannot establish minimum contacts; requires purposeful, continuing contacts)
- Attaway v. Omega, 903 N.E.2d 73 (Ind. Ct. App. 2009) (contract with Indiana resident for out-of-state property; heightened contact facts)
- Mid-States Aircraft Engines, Inc. v. Mize Co., Inc., 467 N.E.2d 1242 (Ind. Ct. App. 1984) (entering contract with Indiana resident alone not determinative post Burger King)
- Woodmar Coin Center, Inc. v. Owen, 447 N.E.2d 618 (Ind. Ct. App. 1983) (precedent on jurisdiction and contract in Indiana)
- be2 LLC v. Ivanov, 642 F.3d 555 (7th Cir. 2011) (website alone not sufficient to establish personal jurisdiction)
- Brokemond v. Marshall Field & Co., 612 N.E.2d 143 (Ind. Ct. App. 1993) (advertising to Indiana residents does not create jurisdiction for out-of-state injury)
- Szakacs v. Anheuser-Busch Companies, Inc., 644 F. Supp. 1121 (N.D. Ind. 1986) (nationwide advertising to visit out-of-state park not jurisdictional basis)
- Russo v. Sea World of Florida, Inc., 709 F. Supp. 39 (D. R.I. 1989) (buying ticket to out-of-state attraction insufficient for jurisdiction)
- Lane v. Vacation Charters, Ltd., 750 F. Supp. 120 (S.D.N.Y. 1990) (execution of contract in home state with out-of-state performance not jurisdictional)
- JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. v. Desert Palace, Inc., 882 N.E.2d 743 (Ind. Ct. App. 2008) (payment from forum state alone not jurisdictional)