Court Opinion

ID: 9699204
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-25 20:13:25.104312+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:20:47.461150
License: Public Domain

Archer, J.
(concurring in part and dissenting in part). I concur in the result of the majority’s opinion in Witbeck v Bill Cody’s Ranch Inn. However, I dissent in Hapner v Solis Apparatus Manufactories.
The Michigan long-arm statute, MCL 600.715; MSA 27A.715, provides as follows:
The existence of any of the following relationships between a corporation or its agent and the state shall constitute a sufficient basis of jurisdiction to enable the courts of record of this state to exercise limited personal jurisdiction over such corporation and to enable such courts to render personal judgments against such corporation arising out of the act or acts which create any of the following relationships:
(1) The transaction of any business within the state.
(2) The doing or causing any act to be done, or consequences to occur, in the state resulting in an action for tort.
See also Schneider v Linkfield, 389 Mich 608; 209 NW2d 225 (1973).
I would hold that the proofs now offered by plaintiffs establish jurisdiction and create a question of fact for a jury. I would reverse the decisions of the trial court and the Court of Appeals.