HomeMy WebLinkAbout0868 •
i
Stated more simply, the Court finds that as a matter of
,,.>;-sc
fact, Defencian (presumably a wealthy corporation) did foresee the
fact that one or more of its "bases" would get into interstate
commerce and wind up in Florida, in Alaska, and in Hawaii. Common
sense cannot be denied: Likewise the local cobbler, the five acre
mamma-papa orange grower, the three cow rancher, the one horse farmer,
and~the green law-school graduate must be held to foresee that their
respective "shoe, orange, hamburger, tomato, or last will and testa-
ment" will be consumed or utilized in Maine, Alaska and Hawaii. Again
common sense cannot be denied. Assuming ~n appropriate long arm statute
in t~iaine, Alaska and Hawaii, and assuming further a respective defect
such as a broken heel, poisonous insecticide in the orange juice, DES
in the hamburger, worms in the tomatoes, and one witness on a will;
obviously legal harm can come to the citizen of Maine, Alaska and
Hawaii who purchased or utilized such an item. In each case the
"local vendor" is normally liable so a remed at law does exist in the
local forum state. Should a citizen elect to buy one of those commodi-
ties "out of state" a remedy at law still exists in the foreign state
where the contract was accepted. Simply stated (on the other side of
case .
the coin) in this/now before the Court, there is insufficient evidence
to support the "greater weight of the evidence" requirement to prove
4
i
I that PLASTIC INDUSTRIES, INC. "purposefully availed itself of the
i privilege of conducting activies within the forum state." So much for
the "foreseeability fiction" and the facts of this case.
Having adjudicated the facts pertaining to jurisdiction
let us now turn to the applicable law.
INTRODUCTION
Much to the writer's surprise, during .the time the jurisdictional
aspect of this case has been debated and re-debated,~the United States
Supreme Court was likewise active in this field. The recent case
hereinafter discussed in the majority opinion of the 7 to 2 decision
the following statement of Justice White appears (pp 564).:
i
SOOR JcK1 P~
-5-
~ -