Clarence Jones v. ITT Systems Division, No. 14-2310 (8th Cir. 2015)
Annotate this CaseCourt Description: Civil case - Civil procedure. Defendant did not have sufficient minimum contacts with Missouri to satisfy due process, and the dismissal for lack of personal jurisdiction is affirmed without comment.
Download PDF
United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________ No. 14-2310 ___________________________ Clarence T. Jones lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellant v. ITT Systems Division lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellee ____________ Appeal from United States District Court for the Western District of Missouri - Kansas City ____________ Submitted: March 5, 2015 Filed: March 13, 2015 [Unpublished] ____________ Before SMITH, GRUENDER, and BENTON, Circuit Judges. ____________ PER CURIAM. Clarence T. Jones appeals the district court’s1 dismissal of his action without prejudice for lack of personal jurisdiction over defendant. After de novo review, see 1 The Honorable Dean Whipple, United States District Judge for the Western District of Missouri. Dever v. Hentzen Coatings, Inc., 380 F.3d 1070, 1072 (8th Cir. 2004), this court affirms. The record shows that defendant did not have sufficient minimum contacts with Missouri to satisfy due process, as required for specific jurisdiction, see Myers v. Casino Queen, Inc., 689 F.3d 904, 911 (8th Cir. 2012) (listing appropriate factors to consider); Bell Paper Box, Inc. v. Trans W. Polymers, Inc., 53 F.3d 920, 922-23 (8th Cir. 1995) (merely entering into contract with forum resident does not provide requisite contacts between nonresident defendant and forum state; use of interstate facilities, such as telephones or mail, cannot alone provide minimum contacts required by due process); and defendant did not have continuous and systematic relations with Missouri, as required for general jurisdiction, see Daimler AG v. Bauman, 134 S. Ct. 746, 760-61 & n.19 (2014) (general jurisdiction inquiry is whether corporation’s affiliations with forum state are so continuous and systematic as to render it essentially at home in forum state; place of incorporation and principal place of business are paradigm bases for general jurisdiction). The judgment is affirmed. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. ______________________________ -2-
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
