Robey v. Hinners Brief
Robey v. Hinners
Facts:
In 2005, Robey who runs his business in Sikeston, Missouri sold a used 2002 Cadillac Escalade to a Kentucky resident, Hinner, over ebay auction. As Robey advertised, the car was “clean, better and average” and with an “ 1 month/1,000 mile Service Agreement”. After Hinner bought the car, he realized that the car was not as advertised. Robey argued that since he was not a resident, and the lack of personal jurisdiction that he should be dismissed. Issue:
Even though Robey was non-resident, did Kentucky state have personal jurisdiction over him? Holding:
No, Robey didn't have enough minimum contacts due to the fact that he is non-resident in kentucky. Minimum contacts is used to determine if a defendant can be asserted by personal jurisdiction by a court in one state. Therefore, Kentucky's trial court doesn't have personal jurisdiction over a non-resident, Robey. Reasoning:
A court's jurisdiction over the parties that are involved in a law suits is personal jurisdiction. The court must exercise personal jurisdiction in order to enforce its rulings. Hinner held the extension of in personam jurisdiction could be applied from KRS 454.210. The defendant requested to dismiss the complaint by not meeting the minimum contacts for being non-resident. However, the trial court disregard the lack of minimum contacts and prosecuted the defendant. The Court of Appeal revised the order due to the non-resident defendant was not subject to personal jurisdiction under Kentucky and a single internet sale, such as an ebay transaction in this case didn't create sufficient minimum contacts for the defendant in Kentucky.
Facts:
In 2005, Robey who runs his business in Sikeston, Missouri sold a used 2002 Cadillac Escalade to a Kentucky resident, Hinner, over ebay auction. As Robey advertised, the car was “clean, better and average” and with an “ 1 month/1,000 mile Service Agreement”. After Hinner bought the car, he realized that the car was not as advertised. Robey argued that since he was not a resident, and the lack of personal jurisdiction that he should be dismissed. Issue:
Even though Robey was non-resident, did Kentucky state have personal jurisdiction over him? Holding:
No, Robey didn't have enough minimum contacts due to the fact that he is non-resident in kentucky. Minimum contacts is used to determine if a defendant can be asserted by personal jurisdiction by a court in one state. Therefore, Kentucky's trial court doesn't have personal jurisdiction over a non-resident, Robey. Reasoning:
A court's jurisdiction over the parties that are involved in a law suits is personal jurisdiction. The court must exercise personal jurisdiction in order to enforce its rulings. Hinner held the extension of in personam jurisdiction could be applied from KRS 454.210. The defendant requested to dismiss the complaint by not meeting the minimum contacts for being non-resident. However, the trial court disregard the lack of minimum contacts and prosecuted the defendant. The Court of Appeal revised the order due to the non-resident defendant was not subject to personal jurisdiction under Kentucky and a single internet sale, such as an ebay transaction in this case didn't create sufficient minimum contacts for the defendant in Kentucky.