Jeffrey Hause v. LG Chem, Ltd. Appeal from 34th District Court of El Paso County (dissenting opinion)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
COURT OF APPEALS EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS EL PASO, TEXAS JEFFREY HAUSE, § No. 08-20-00197-CV § Appeal from the v. § 34th Judicial District Court LG CHEM, LTD., § of El Paso County, Texas § (TC# 2018DCV3420) Appellant, Appellee. DISSENTING OPINION A bedrock tenet of specific jurisdiction law is that the plaintiff’s injury claim must arise out of or relate to the non-resident’s contacts with the forum state. Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. Superior Ct. of California, San Francisco County, 137 S.Ct. 1773, 1780 (2017). The majority opinion ably details LG Chem, Ltd.’s contacts with Texas. For the reasons explained by three intermediate appellate courts, however, I fail to find that those contacts are sufficiently connected with Mr. Hause’s injury to establish specific jurisdiction over LG Chem, Ltd. See LG Chem, Ltd. v. Turner, No. 14-19-00326-CV, 2021 WL 2154075, at *1 (Tex.App.--Houston [14th Dist.] May 27, 2021, no pet.) (mem. op.); Schexnider v. E-Cig Central, LLC, No. 06-20-00003-CV, 2020 WL 6929872, at *9 (Tex.App.--Texarkana Nov. 25, 2020, no pet.) (mem. op.); LG Chem, Ltd. v. Superior Ct. of San Diego County, 295 Cal.Rptr.3d 661, 677 (Cal.App. 4th Dist. 2022). Lacking the prose to better explain the argument than the authors of these three opinions, I defer and adopt their reasoning and rationale. And consequently, I respectfully dissent. October 6, 2022 JEFF ALLEY, Justice Before Rodriguez, C.J., Palafox, and Alley, JJ. 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.
