Bankplus v. Toyota of New Orleans
| Docket Number: | 2002-CA-01403-COA | |
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 08-05-2003 Opinion Author: Myers, J. Holding: Reversed and Remanded |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Contract - Personal jurisdiction - Long-arm statute - Section 13-3-57 - Due process Judge(s) Concurring: McMillin, C.J., King and Southwick, P.JJ., Bridges, Thomas, Lee, Irving, Chandler and Griffis, JJ. Procedural History: Jury Trial Nature of the Case: CIVIL - CONTRACT |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 07-26-2002 Appealed from: Pearl River County Circuit Court Judge: Michael R. Eubanks Disposition: MOTION BY TOYOTA OF NEW ORLEANS TO DISMISS GRANTED. Case Number: 2001-0479 |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | |||
| Appellant: | Bankplus |
ROBERT P. THOMPSON
LYN BUTLER DODSON |
||
| Appellee: | Toyota of New Orleans | RICHARD C. FITZPATRICK |
|
|
Synopsis provided by:  If you are interested in subscribing to the weekly synopses of all Mississippi Supreme Court and Court of Appeals hand downs please contact Tammy Upton in the MLI Press office. |
|
| Topic: | Contract - Personal jurisdiction - Long-arm statute - Section 13-3-57 - Due process |
| Summary of the Facts: | BankPlus filed suit against Toyota of New Orleans in Pearl River County Circuit Court. Toyota is not a Mississippi business, nor is it qualified to do business in Mississippi. The court dismissed the action, and BankPlus appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Issue 1: Long-arm statute BankPlus argues that the court erred in finding it lacked personal jurisdiction over Toyota. The exercise of in personam jurisdiction of a nonresident defendant may be accomplished pursuant to section 13-3-57. The threshold condition for application of the long-arm statute is the requirement that the nonresident corporation is not a corporation qualified to do business in this state. Toyota meets this condition. The statute may then be properly utilized where the nonresident made a contract with a resident of this state to be performed in whole or in part in this state; where the nonresident committed a tort in whole or in part in this state against a resident or nonresident of this state; or where the nonresident did business or performed any character of work or service in this state. There was a contract between BankPlus and Toyota. It is apparent that some agreement was reached resulting in BankPlus releasing the lien on the Camry and mailing the title and cashier's check to Toyota. While Toyota claims it does not do any business in Mississippi, it does advertise in a manner that reaches Pearl River County and does not hesitate to sell to Mississippi residents. Toyota entered into a transaction with BankPlus in Mississippi and the action arises from the transaction. Toyota paid a reduced fee for someone to tow the Camry from Mississippi to its dealership in Louisiana. This strengthens the argument that Toyota was doing business in the State of Mississippi. Issue 2: Due process A defendant must have minimum contacts with the forum state so that the maintenance of the suit does not offend traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice. Jurisdiction is labeled "specific" when the nonresident defendant's contacts with the forum state are directly related to the cause of action. Toyota has contacts directly related to the cause of action, thus specific jurisdiction is met. Since Jarrell and BankPlus are located in Pearl River County and New Orleans is not that far from the forum, it is efficient to have the trial in Pearl River County and does not place any unreasonable burden on Toyota. Toyota could reasonably have foreseen that by accepting the title to the Camry and negotiating BankPlus's check without forwarding the title of the Avalon to BankPlus, it would be sued by BankPlus. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
