1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. P.3d
  4. 395 P.3d
  5. 395 P.3d 1021 (2017)
 

NOLL v. AMERICAN BILTRITE INC.

No. 91998-4.

395 P.3d 1021 (2017)

Donald NOLL and Candance Noll, husband and wife, Respondents, v. AMERICAN BILTRITE INC.; Ametek Inc.; Bird Incorporated; BorgWarner Morse Tec Inc., as successor-by-merger to Borg-Warner Corporation; CBS Corporation, a Delaware corporation f/k/a Viacom Inc., successor-by-merger to CBS Corporation, a Pennsylvania corporation f/k/a Westinghouse Electric Corporation; Certain-Teed Corporation; Conwed Corporation; Domco Products Texas Inc.; Ford Motor Company; General Electric Company; Georgia-Pacific LLC; Hercules Incorporated; Honeywell International Inc.; Industrial Holdings Corporation f/k/a The Carborundum Company; Ingersoll-Rand Company; J-M Manufacturing Company Inc.; Kaiser Gypsum Company Inc.; Kelly Moore Paint Company Inc.; Saberhagen Holdings Inc.; Simpson Lumber Company LLC; and Simpson Timber Company, Defendants, Special Electric Company, Inc., Petitioner.

Supreme Court of Washington.

Filed June 8, 2017.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Michael Barr King , Rory Drew Cosgrove , Carney Badley Spellman PS, 701 5th Ave., Ste. 3600, Seattle, WA, 98104-7010, for Petitioner.

Brian D. Weinstein , Benjamin Robert Couture , Alexandra Brett Caggiano , Weinstein Couture PLLC, 601 Union Street, Suite 2420, Seattle, WA, 98101, William A. Kohlburn , Ryan J. Kiwala , Simmons Hanly Conroy, 231 Bemiston Avenue, Suite 525, St. Louis, MO, 63105, for Respondents.

Stewart Andrew Estes , Keating, Bucklin & McCormack, Inc., P.S., 800 Fifth Ave., Ste. 4141, Seattle, WA, 98104-3175, Christopher Weldon Nicoll , Noah Jaffe, Nicoll Black and Feig PLLC, 1325 4th Ave., Ste. 1650, Seattle, WA, 98101-2506, as Amicus Curiae on behalf of Washington Defense Trial Lawyers.

Stewart Andrew Estes , Keating, Bucklin & McCormack, Inc., P.S., 800 Fifth Ave., Ste. 4141, Seattle, WA, 98104-3175, as Amicus Curiae on behalf of Defense Research Institute.

¶ 1 For a Washington court to exercise specific personal jurisdiction over a defendant, the plaintiff must allege that the defendant purposefully availed itself of the privilege of doing business in Washington, thus invoking the benefits and protections of our laws. Without any such allegation, exercising jurisdiction would not comport...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases