Question

In Blimka v. My Web Wholesalers an Idaho resident, Blimka, ordered a large quantity of jeans from My Web, a Maine company that advertised its goods on the Internet. When a dispute arose over the quality of the jeans, Blimka sued My Web in Idaho state court. My Web contended the Idaho court did not have jurisdiction. The Idaho high court held that:a. the defendants' actions did not satisfy minimum contacts with respect to the fraud allegations b. the defendants' actions did satisfy minimum contacts with respect to the fraud allegationsc. the defendants did not visit Idaho often enough for Blimka to sue them in an Idaho Courtd. Blimka could sue the defendants in Idaho because the defendants owned property in Idahoe. none of the choices are correct

Answer 1

Answer:

B) the defendants' actions did satisfy minimum contacts with respect to the fraud allegations

Explanation:

In common law, minimum contacts is a legal term used by state civil courts to determine whether that state court has jurisdiction over a foreign citizen. In this case, foreign citizen refers to a company incorporated in another state (Maine).

The state court of Idaho determined that My Web Wholesalers had minimum contacts with the state of Idaho because it sold its products there. Even though they did not have an actual retail store in the state, My Web sold its products through the internet to citizens of Idaho. Therefore, the civil court of Idaho has jurisdiction to serve My Web Wholesalers.

Answer 2

Answer:

1. Yes, if they do active business. The standard is the same as it is for traditional businesses. Once a business “enters” a state to do business, especially when there are actual sales, not just discussions, it subjects itself to its law.

2. The case was probably for less than $75,000, since the money paid was about $21,000. Even allowing for lost profits Blimka may have earned by resale, it would be unlikely to be enough for diversity jurisdiction. In any case, My Web failed to show up to defend itself and lost. So later when it lost on the claim of lack of jurisdiction, it could not ask for another day in court.

Explanation: