Young

Young v. Daimler AG CA1/4

Good Law
175 Cal. Rptr. 3d 811·2014 Cal. App. LEXIS 704·228 Cal. App. 4th 855·2014 WL 3827652·331 P.3d 179
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJuly 7, 2014A135999California5,188 words

Opinion

Opinion

Reardon, J.

In this products liability action, the trial court granted a motion to quash service of summons for lack of personal jurisdiction filed by specially appearing defendant Daimler AG, a German public stock company (Daimler). Appellants contend that the trial court’s jurisdictional decision is erroneous, as a finding of general personal jurisdiction over Daimler is appropriate based on the substantial California contacts of current and former indirect subsidiaries of Daimler that are attributable to the German company under theories of agency. Finding the United States Supreme Court’s recent decision in Daimler AG v. Bauman (2014) 571 U.S._ [ 187 L.Ed.2d 624 , 134 S.Ct. 746 ] (Bauman II) dispositive on the jurisdictional issue and contrary to the arguments advanced by appellants, we affirm.

I. BACKGROUND

On August 29, 2008, Kimberly Patrice Young (Young) and her daughter, Keyona Chester (collectively, appellants), were driving a 2004 Jeep Cherokee in San Joaquin County, California, when the vehicle rolled over, causing the roof to collapse. As a result of this incident, Young sustained catastrophic injuries, rendering her a permanent quadriplegic. In addition, Young’s…

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.