Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

HICKS v. KAWASAKI HEAVY INDUS.

June 15, 1978

James HICKS, Plaintiff,
v.
KAWASAKI HEAVY INDUSTRIES, Defendant. KAWASAKI MOTORS CORPORATION, U.S.A., Defendant and Third-Party Plaintiff, v. Cindy Lee BOYER, Third-Party Defendant



The opinion of the court was delivered by: HERMAN

 HERMAN, District Judge.

 Defendant Kawasaki Heavy Industries, Ltd., has indicated that it is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of Japan, engaged in the manufacture of motorcycles and other products. Kawasaki Heavy Industries, Ltd., sells motorcycles to Kawasaki Motors Corporation, U.S.A., a Delaware Corporation. They indicate that all sales by Kawasaki Heavy Industries, Ltd. of motorcycles for the American market are made in Japan pursuant to order placed by Kawasaki Motors Corporation, U.S.A. Deliveries are made by Kawasaki Heavy Industries, Ltd. to Kawasaki Motors Corporation in Japan. Kawasaki Heavy Industries, Ltd. contends that it is not doing business in Pennsylvania, that Kawasaki Motors Corporation, U.S.A. is not its agent in Pennsylvania, and that it has insufficient minimum contacts with Pennsylvania to satisfy due process, and therefore this Court lacks personal jurisdiction over it.

 Plaintiff relies on Pennsylvania's longarm statute, 42 Pa.Cons.Stat.Ann. § 8301 et seq. (Purdon), as the basis for personal jurisdiction over Defendant Kawasaki Heavy Industries, Ltd. *fn1" Section 8302 deals with non-qualified foreign corporations and provides generally that any such corporation ". . . which shall have done any business in this Commonwealth without procuring a certificate of authority . . ." is presumed to have designated the Pennsylvania Department of State as its attorney for service of process. Section 8309 more specifically provides:

 
"(a) General Rule. - Any of the following shall constitute 'doing business' for the purposes of this chapter:
 
(1) The doing by any person in this Commonwealth of a series of similar acts for the purpose of thereby realizing pecuniary benefit or otherwise accomplishing an object.
 
(2) The doing of a single act in this Commonwealth for the purpose of thereby realizing pecuniary benefit or otherwise accomplishing an object with the intention of initiating a series of such acts.
 
(3) The shipping of merchandise directly or indirectly into or through this Commonwealth.
 
(4) The engaging in any business or profession within this Commonwealth, whether or not such business requires license or approval by the Commonwealth or any of its agencies.
 
(5) The ownership, use or possession of any real property situate within this Commonwealth.
 
(b) Exercise of full constitutional power over foreign corporations. - In addition to the provisions of subsection (a) of this section the jurisdiction and venue of courts of the Commonwealth shall extend to all foreign corporations and the powers exercised by them to the fullest extent allowed under the Constitution of the United States.
 
(c) Exception. - . . . [none here applicable]."

 The power of a federal court entertaining a suit based on diversity of citizenship to exercise in personam jurisdiction over a nonresident defendant turns on two considerations. The law of the state in which a federal court sits must confer in personam jurisdiction over the defendant, and if it does, exercise of jurisdiction under state law must comport with basic due process requirements of the United States Constitution. George Transport & Rigging Co., Inc. v. International Publications Equipment Corp., 425 F. Supp. 1351 (E.D.Pa.1977). A Plaintiff must state sufficient facts in the complaint to invoke jurisdiction, and once jurisdiction has been denied, the ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.