Docstoc

BURGER KING V. RUDZEWICZ

Document Sample
BURGER KING V. RUDZEWICZ Powered By Docstoc
					CIV PRO
BURGER KING V. RUDZEWICZ, Supreme Court of US, 1985. 471 US 462, 105 S.Ct. 2174, 85 L.Ed.2d 528. History: BK brought diversity action in Federal Dist. Ct. in FL b/c franchisees had breached their franchise obligations and BK was seeking damages and injunctive relief; Court held franchisees were subject to personal jurisdiction under FL long-arm statute; Court of Appeals reversed holding jurisdiction in this case would offend due process; Appeal from 11th Circuit US Ct. of Appeals Facts: BK is FL corporation whose main offices are in FL; franchises are licensed to use trademark, etc. for 20 years; day-to-day monitoring is done through district offices, who then report to headquarters in Miami; Contracts provide franchise relationship is est. in Miami and governed by FL law; Rudzewicz (MI) franchised a BK and it went under Issue(s): Whether FL, under 14th Amendment, can exercise jurisdiction over Rudzewicz for BK case. Holding: Exercise of jurisdiction did not offend 14th Amendment Analysis: Foreseeability that is critical to due process analysis is if defendant’s conduct and connection w/forum state are such that he should reasonably anticipate being dragged into court there; Prior negotiations and contemplated future consequences determine whether defendant purposefully established minimum contacts w/forum state; Rudzewicz deliberately reached out beyond MI and negotiated w/FL corporation a long-term franchise and the benefits that would derive from affiliation w/nationwide organization Contract documents say BK’s operations are conducted and supervised in FL; Rudzewicz also received fair notice from contract papers


				
DOCUMENT INFO