Glitter is a corporation that rents expensive jewelry to businesses and individuals. It is incorporated in Delaware and has its principal place of business in northern Indiana. It is licensed to do business in every state except Alaska and Hawaii. Flick, Inc., is a movie company incorporated in Idaho with its principal place of business in Utah. It does no business to speak of in any other state.
During Flick's filming in Nevada, an expensive necklace rented from Glitter falls into a piece of machinery on the set and is destroyed. Glitter wants to sue Flick for negligently destroying the jewelry (worth $700,000). Flick decides to sue Glitter, blaming the loss of a week's filming on the loss of the necklace, which they claim was caused by a faulty clasp made by Glitter. After using the charting method described in this section, answer the following questions:
Charting method applied to the case:
GLITTER V. FLICK FOR NECKLACE

\begin{array}{lccc}& \text { Subj. } & &{\text { Pers. }} \\\text { Court } & \text { Matter } & \text { Juris. } & \text { Venue } & \text { Juris. } \\\text { Delaware State } & \text { Yes } && \text { No } & \text { No } \\\text { Indiana State } & \text { Yes } && \text { No } & \text { No } \\\text { Idaho State } & \text { Yes } && \text { Yes } & \text { Yes } \\\text { Utah State } & \text { Yes } && \text { Yes } & \text { Yes }\end{array}

\begin{array}{lllll}\text { Nevada State } & \text { Yes } & \text { (diversity) } & \text { Yes } & ?^{*} \\\text { Delaware } & \text { Yes } & \text { (diversity) } & \text { No } & \text { No } \\\text { Federal } & & & &\\\text { Indiana Federal } & \text { Yes } & \text { (diversity) } & \text { No } & \text { No } \\\text { Idaho Federal } & \text { Yes } & \text { (diversity) } & \text { Yes } & \text { Yes } \\\text { Utah Federal } & \text { Yes } & \text { (diversity) } & \text { Yes } & \text { Yes } \\\text { Nevada Federal } & \text { Yes } & \text { (diversity) } & \text { Yes } & !^{*}\end{array}

*ISSUE: Is filming a movie in a state a sufficient contact to allow personal service? (May depend on state statutes and overall degree of contacts.)

$Glitter is a corporation that rents expensive jewelry to businesses and individuals. It is incorporated in Delaware and has its principal place of business in northern Indiana. It is licensed to do business in every state except Alaska and Hawaii. Flick, Inc., is a movie company incorporated in Idaho with its principal place of business in Utah. It does no business to speak of in any other state. During Flick's filming in Nevada, an expensive necklace rented from Glitter falls into a piece of machinery on the set and is destroyed. Glitter wants to sue Flick for negligently destroying the jewelry (worth $700,000). Flick decides to sue Glitter, blaming the loss of a week's filming on the loss of the necklace, which they claim was caused by a faulty clasp made by Glitter. After using the charting method described in this section, answer the following questions: Charting method applied to the case: GLITTER V. FLICK FOR NECKLACE \begin{array}{lccc}& \text { Subj. } & &{\text { Pers. }} \\ \text { Court } & \text { Matter } & \text { Juris. } & \text { Venue } & \text { Juris. } \\ \text { Delaware State } & \text { Yes } && \text { No } & \text { No } \\ \text { Indiana State } & \text { Yes } && \text { No } & \text { No } \\ \text { Idaho State } & \text { Yes } && \text { Yes } & \text { Yes } \\ \text { Utah State } & \text { Yes } && \text { Yes } & \text { Yes } \end{array} \begin{array}{lllll} \text { Nevada State } & \text { Yes } & \text { (diversity) } & \text { Yes } & ?^{*} \\ \text { Delaware } & \text { Yes } & \text { (diversity) } & \text { No } & \text { No } \\ \text { Federal } & & & &\\ \text { Indiana Federal } & \text { Yes } & \text { (diversity) } & \text { No } & \text { No } \\ \text { Idaho Federal } & \text { Yes } & \text { (diversity) } & \text { Yes } & \text { Yes } \\ \text { Utah Federal } & \text { Yes } & \text { (diversity) } & \text { Yes } & \text { Yes } \\ \text { Nevada Federal } & \text { Yes } & \text { (diversity) } & \text { Yes } & !^{*} \end{array} *ISSUE: Is filming a movie in a state a sufficient contact to allow personal service? (May depend on state statutes and overall degree of contacts.) a. If Glitter sues Flick, is there subject matter jurisdiction in federal district court? b. What, if any, kind of subject matter jurisdiction exists in federal district court? c. What issue concerning personal jurisdiction exists when considering suit by Glitter against Flick in Nevada state and federal court? d. Aside from Nevada, in what state and federal courts can Glitter sue Flick? e. If Flick sues Glitter, does venue exist in the state courts of Idaho and Utah? Why or why not?$

a. If Glitter sues Flick, is there subject matter jurisdiction in federal district court?
b. What, if any, kind of subject matter jurisdiction exists in federal district court?
c. What issue concerning personal jurisdiction exists when considering suit by Glitter against Flick in Nevada state and federal court?
d. Aside from Nevada, in what state and federal courts can Glitter sue Flick?
e. If Flick sues Glitter, does venue exist in the state courts of Idaho and Utah? Why or why not?

Obtain or Create a Diagram of Your State System, Noting

Essay

Correct Answer:VerifiedThis response will v...View AnswerUnlock this answer nowGet Access to more Verified Answers free of chargeView Full Answer For Free

Correct Answer:
Verified
This response will v...
View Answer
Unlock this answer now
Get Access to more Verified Answers free of charge