Thomas

The issue on this appeal is whether the respondent, a New York corporation, is subject to the jurisdiction of the courts of California.

The answer turns upon whether the respondent was "doing business” in California within the purview of Code of Civil Procedure, section 411, subdivision 2; or, more precisely, whether the assumption of jurisdiction over defendant violates the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

The trial court found for the respondent and granted its motion to quash service of process. The plaintiff below has appealed from that order. For the reasons hereinbelow stated we find it necessary to reverse the trial court’s order quashing service of process.

The Material Facts

Appellant is a three-year-old female suing through her guardian ad litem, for damages arising out of burns suffered when the bathing suit she was wearing ignited and burst into flames upon contact with an automobile cigarette lighter.

The defendants are J. C. Penney Company, from whose Martinez, California, store the bathing suit was purchased ; Keith Miller, manager of that store; J. P. Stevens & Company, Inc.; Dan River Mills, Inc.; and the respondent, Fairy-Tale Children’s Wear,…