Court Opinion

ID: 9473279
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-05 04:25:02.448215+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:43:25.730491
License: Public Domain

NIES, Circuit Judge,
concurring in part.
I join in the majority opinion except in Part III. In Scott v. Mego International, Inc., 519 F.Supp. 1118, 1126 (D.Minn.1981), the court (interpreting the law of the forum) held that a parent corporation may subject itself to jurisdiction of the state of Minnesota by virtue of its subsidiary’s activities there if one corporation is operated as an instrumentality or adjunct of the other, i.e., as an alter ego. In reaching this conclusion, the court relied on Lakota Girl Scout Council, Inc. v. Havey Fund-Raising Management Inc., 519 F.2d 634 (8th Cir.1975), which held that, under Iowa law, a corporation and an individual were alter egos and could be treated as one and the same for jurisdictional purposes.
The finding that ECL and the Rynnes are alter egos of ECI is not clearly erroneous. Thus, in personam jurisdiction and venue requirements with respect to ECL and the Rynnes are not independently required. Due process with respect to those parties is satisfied by affording a hearing to determine whether the parties were alter egos and, of course, by proper service of process. Zenith Corp. v. Hazeltine, 395 U.S. 100, 111, 89 S.Ct. 1562, 1570, 23 L.Ed.2d 129 (1969). No challenge is made that the hearing or service was inadequate.
In the absence of Minnesota precedent, I prefer to reserve a decision on the broader issue of substitution or addition of a party on the basis of being a successor in interest.