Messerschmidt Development Co. v. Crutcher Resources Corp.

Good Law
149 Cal. Rptr. 35·1978 Cal. App. LEXIS 1923·84 Cal. App. 3d 819
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaSeptember 13, 1978Civ. 52755California2,154 words

Opinion

Opinion

Lillie, J.

The complaint of plaintiff corporation sets forth three causes of action—the first for cancellation and the second for rescission of a settlement agreement and promissory note, and the third for declaratory relief respecting defendants’ claim for compensation which had given rise to the settlement and note. Named as defendants were Adrian Wilson, Crutcher Resources Corporation (Crutcher), D. H. Hartmann, Eric Gohl, S. C. Oliphant, and D. E. Gresset. Gresset and Hartmann are former employees of Crutcher. Gohl and Oliphant are current employees, residents of England. All defendants save for Wilson, a California resident, were served with summons and complaint by certified mail sent to Crutcher’s headquarters in Houston, Texas. These defendants, except Wilson, moved to quash service of summons for lack of personal jurisdiction or, in the alternative, to dismiss the action on the ground of inconvenient forum. The motion to quash was granted. Plaintiffs moved for reconsideration. Motion for reconsideration was granted, but the motion to quash was again granted. Plaintiffs appeal. We affirm the order.

A California court may exercise judicial jurisdiction over nonresidents on…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.