Multiple Choice
DFA,a Kansas cooperative,has its principal place of business in Kansas City,Missouri.Bassett,an international commodities broker and a Canadian corporation,has its principal place of business in Toronto,Ontario.Bassett is not qualified to do business in Missouri; has no agent for service of process,offices,property,bank accounts,telephone listings,or employees there; and does not advertise or promote its business there.Between July 2009 and February 2011,Bassett purchased more than 3.5 million pounds of dairy products from DFA in about 80 transactions totaling $5 million.The parties did not have a long-term contract,agreeing to each transaction individually by phone.Bassett communicated by phone and email with DFA's Missouri headquarters about delivery and billing.Bassett stopped paying on his account at DFA and DFA sued Bassett in Missouri for failure to pay.The district court dismissed the suit for lack of personal jurisdiction.The total amount due on the account was $220,000.
-Which of the following is correct about in personam jurisdiction?
A) The courts of Missouri would have jurisdiction over the case because Bassett did business on a regular basis with a Missouri company.
B) The courts of Missouri would not have jurisdiction because Bassett had no presence in the state.
C) The terms of the contract would control whether the courts of Missouri had jurisdiction over Bassett.
D) No state in the United States would have jurisdiction over Bassett.
Correct Answer:

Verified
Correct Answer:
Verified
Q44: An appellate court can require that a
Q45: An appeal of an IRS decision against
Q46: Federal district courts are the general trial
Q47: Emma Samuels is a resident of St.Johnsbury,Vermont.She
Q48: List three ways your case would properly
Q50: Adrienne Zhang,a resident of Beijing,China,took provera,a hormone,through
Q51: Which label is appropriate for the party
Q52: ValuJet,Inc.is an airline based in Florida.The airline
Q53: Jane DeRonnee had carpet installed in her
Q54: When a case is remanded,the lower court