"After a review of these authorities, we conclude that National did not subject itself to specific jurisdiction in California merely by accepting premium payments from California and by processing and paying claims submitted by its insureds for services rendered in this state. National did not 'come here' voluntarily, no matter how many insureds did. It was the unilateral decision of Elkman and other insureds to relocate to California which caused National to accept payments from this state and to process and pay claims for services rendered in this state. These circumstances do not support a findin National purposefully availed itself of forum benefits so as to make it subject to specific jurisdiction in California.
Justice H. Walter Croskey
Elkman v. National States Insurance Company (B205919, May 14, 2009)
pp. 20-21
About Me
- Pamela Fasick
- I am a member of the California bar who provides research and writing services to other attorneys on a contract basis. The vast majority of my work has been in civil litigation. As a result I'm interested in new developments in a broad range of subject areas and, of course, any changes in civil procedure.
Subscribe Now:
