 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Croix Retail9/23/2003
Appellant Logiciel, Inc., challenges the district court's denial of its motion to dismiss the suit filed against it by respondent Croix Retail, Inc., for lack of personal jurisdiction and under the doctrine of forum non conveniens. We affirm.
FACTS
Croix is a Minnesota corporation that operates 15 retail clothing stores throughout the United States and has its principal place of business in Winona. Logiciel is a California corporation that produces and sells"Retail-ease," a computer software program designed to allow retailers to collect and transmit sales and inventory data. Logiciel has conducted business with retailers in 26 states, including Minnesota, and at one time (1997) maintained local offices throughout the country. Logiciel has never sent representatives or direct mailings to Minnesota or otherwise specifically solicited business from Minnesota customers. Logiciel maintains a website that describes its products, invites purchase inquiries via email or telephone, and allows visitors to run a product demonstration.
A Croix employee approached the Logiciel exhibition booth at a March 1999 international trade show in Las Vegas, Nevada, and discussed Retail-ease with a Logiciel representative. Two Croix employees subsequently visited the Logiciel offices in California and Croix requested a proposal for Logiciel to supply Croix's San Francisco store with one licensed copy of the Retail-ease program and its accompanying hardware. Croix later purchased additional software and hardware from Logiciel. Logiciel trained Croix employees in Logiciel's California offices and provided technical support and training via telephone to Croix employees in Minnesota. Croix's information technology manager ran the product demonstration available on Logiciel's website. During the time Croix used Retail-ease, Logiciel sent software to Croix via post, sent software updates electronically to Croix, electronically accessed and repaired Croix's central computer, participated in frequent telephone conversations with Croix concerning Retail-ease, sent email and invoices to Croix, and received payments from Croix drawn on Croix's Minnesota bank account.
In March 2002, Croix filed suit against Logiciel in Minnesota district court, alleging breach of contract, intentional and negligent misrepresentation, breach of warranty, and negligence, all arising from Croix's dissatisfaction with the products and services purchased from Logiciel. Logiciel filed a motion to dismiss Croix's suit, arguing two points. First, the district court lacked personal jurisdiction over Logiciel due to the latter's limited contacts with Minnesota. Second, the doctrine of forum non conveniens required transferring the matter to a California court. The district court denied the motion to dismiss on both grounds.
DECISION
1. Whether personal jurisdiction exists is a question of law, which this court reviews de novo. Griffis v. Luban, 646 N.W.2d 527, 531 (Minn. 2002). To defeat a motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, the nonmoving party bears the burden of making a prima facie showing of jurisdiction. Hardrives, Inc. v. City of LaCrosse, 307 Minn. 290, 293, 240 N.W.2d 814, 816 (1976). Because Logiciel made its motion to dismiss before trial, Croix's allegations and evidence supporting jurisdiction must be taken as true and the facts must be viewed in the light most favorable to Croix. V.H. v. Estate of Birnbaum, 543 N.W.2d 649, 653 (Minn. 1996).
For a Minnesota court to exercise personal jurisdiction over a nonresident defendant, the defendant must come within the reach of the long-arm statute, Minn. Stat. ยง 543.19 (2002), and the exercise of jur
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 Minnesota Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|