Opinion ID: 2499988
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: commission of tortious act in kansas

Text: In its brief to this court, Aeroflex first contends that K.S.A. 2011 Supp. 60-308(b)(1)(B) can provide the basis for personal jurisdiction on two grounds: (1) TIC (or its agent or coconspirator Filardo) allegedly committed a tortious act in Kansas or (2) TIC's tortious act caused injury in Kansas. As to the first argument, Aeroflex asserts that TIC sought out Filardo while he was in Kansas; that Filardo acquired confidential and proprietary information, including trade secrets, from Aeroflex while he was in Kansas; and Filardo used these trade secrets while working in Kansas and in New Jersey. Aeroflex bases its second argument on its allegation of economic injury resulting at its principal place of business in Wichita.