In Blimka v. My Web Wholesalers an Idaho resident, Blimka, ordered a large quantity of jeans from My Web, a Maine company that advertised its goods on the Internet. When a dispute arose over the quality of the jeans, Blimka sued My Web in Idaho state court. My Web contended the Idaho court did not have jurisdiction. The Idaho high court held that:
A) the defendants' actions did not satisfy minimum contacts with respect to the fraud allegations
B) the defendants' actions did satisfy minimum contacts with respect to the fraud allegations
C) the defendants did not visit Idaho often enough for Blimka to sue them in an Idaho Court
D) Blimka could sue the defendants in Idaho because the defendants owned property in Idaho
E) none of the choices are correct
Correct Answer:
Verified
Q350: In Blimka v. My Web Wholesalers an
Q351: In rem jurisdiction can include jurisdiction over:
A)
Q352: Which kind of property could not be
Q353: Suppose a business in Georgia sets up
Q354: State courts may clearly exercise jurisdiction over
Q356: As the Supreme Court has explained, for
Q357: In rem jurisdiction gives state courts jurisdiction
Q358: A state court can exercise jurisdiction over
Q359: In Blimka v. My Web Wholesalers an
Q360: In rem jurisdiction would not be likely
Unlock this Answer For Free Now!
View this answer and more for free by performing one of the following actions
Scan the QR code to install the App and get 2 free unlocks
Unlock quizzes for free by uploading documents