Today at work I spent a lot of time with the attorney and several consultations with potential clients. Not the least of which being a defense case for someone charged with first and second-degree Murder, as well as a number of serious injury claims.
Today in Civil Procedure we look at a case that attempts, unsuccessfully, to stretch the boundaries of minimum contacts, in World-Wide Volkswagen Corp. v. Woodson, 444 U.S. 286 (1980). In this case, there is an automobile accident that occurs in the State of Oklahoma, in which the party Woodson was severely injured not only by the negligence tort of the other driver but because the gas tank in their vehicle apparently exploded due to a defective design. They sought to recover against the manufacturer and sales company that sold them the vehicle in Messina, NY. They claim that the very nature of the automobile in its mobility and the foreseeability that it could travel anywhere should satisfy the minimum contacts test set up in International Shoe v. Washington. The court disagrees. However, we begin to see the stretching and expanding with a dissension of Justice Brennan who feels that the rest of the court is looking at International shoe too narrowly.