Summary
The Alabama Supreme Court affirmed dismissal of Felicia Brown's product-liability action against German hoist manufacturer ABUS Kransysteme GmbH for lack of personal jurisdiction. The court held that the allegedly defective hoist entered Alabama through an unforeseeable resale outside ABUS's established distribution channels and therefore did not provide a sufficient stream-of-commerce basis for jurisdiction. The court also upheld the trial court's denial of Brown's motion to compel additional jurisdictional discovery.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether Alabama could exercise specific personal jurisdiction over ABUS under the stream-of-commerce or stream-of-commerce-plus theory.
- Whether the Supreme Court of Alabama should overrule Ex parte Alloy Wheels International, Ltd. and adopt the more liberal stream-of-commerce test from the Brennan plurality in Asahi Metal Industry Co. v. Superior Court.
- Whether the trial court exceeded its discretion by denying Brown's motion to compel additional jurisdictional discovery concerning ABUS's nationwide sales and business operations.
Holdings
- Alabama lacked personal jurisdiction over ABUS because the hoist reached Alabama through an unpredictable resale contrary to ABUS's restrictions, not through a regular and anticipated stream of commerce or an authorized distribution channel, and the single resulting contact was insufficient to establish minimum contacts.
- The court declined to overrule Ex parte Alloy Wheels because this case did not present either the Brennan plurality's stream-of-commerce theory or the O'Connor plurality's stream-of-commerce-plus theory as applied in Alloy Wheels.
- The trial court did not exceed its discretion in denying Brown's motion to compel additional jurisdictional discovery because Brown failed to show that the requested information was material to personal jurisdiction after the record established that the particular hoist was not authorized for U.S. distribution and was unrelated to ABUS's authorized U.S. sales.
Key quotations
“The stream of commerce refers not to unpredictable currents or eddies, but to the regular and anticipated flow of products from manufacture to distribution to retail sale.” (11 So. 3d at 797)
“In summary, Brown's theory of jurisdiction is unavailable. She has failed to show that ABUS had the requisite minimum contacts for the assertion of in personam jurisdiction, and she has failed to show that the trial court exceeded its jurisdiction in denying her motion to compel ABUS to respond to further discovery.” (11 So. 3d at 800)
Factual background
Jeremiah Brown was killed in Alabama when a wire rope on a crane hoist snapped and a beam fell on him. The hoist, manufactured by ABUS in Germany in 2000, was specially ordered by a Canadian crane manufacturer and sold in Germany with an agreement that it would not be resold to customers in the United States. The hoist was later acquired by a Michigan company, incorporated into a crane, and installed at an Alabama facility without ABUS's authorization or knowledge. ABUS's authorized U.S. distributor sold other ABUS products but was not involved with the hoist at issue.
Procedural history
Brown sued ABUS and others after her husband's death in a crane accident. ABUS moved to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction, and the trial court allowed limited jurisdictional discovery. After ABUS submitted affidavits concerning the origin and distribution of the hoist, the trial court denied Brown's motion to compel, dismissed the claims against ABUS, and certified the judgment as final under Ala. R. Civ. P. 54(b). The Supreme Court of Alabama affirmed.