Legal Research Writing & Civil Litigation



Legal Research Writing & Civil Litigation

Introduction

In line with the changes and the analysis that has been observed over the years regarding the laws of personal jurisdiction, there have been ample instances where the ability of courts and their influences over all parties of contract has soared under many conditions altogether. Using the IRAC approach (Issue, Rule, Analysis and Conclusion), it would certainly make way for understanding the mundane details of the case altogether (Klos, 2004).

Facts

Froogle Inc. and Mary, an individual proprietor, have incurred an established partnership. Froogle is an internet search engine, where Mary has joined the company to advertise and market its ability to make way for progress that not only makes way for promoting quality ski equipment being offered by her company.

IRAC Analysis

Issue

Froogle complained and pressed charges against Mary on account of violation of agreement that existed between the two parties. While Mary is of the stance that personal jurisdiction does not influence her, not being in physical attendance or presence in California, the place where Froogle lives, the company still pertains to be on the stance that Mary does work and come under the personal jurisdiction imposed by the California law.

Rule

In line with the case above, the implementation and the statute of minimum contracts is applicable. Observing the case “Int'l Shoe Co. v. Wash., 326 U.S. 310 (U.S. 1945)” and under this jurisdiction, even though the defendant might not exist in that particular state, but due to violation and pressing charges against the given jurisdiction and understanding, that violation and breach of contract gave rise to the suit.

Referring to the case “Burger King Corp. v. Rudzewicz, 471 U.S. 462 (U.S. 1985)”, reasons of being incapable or holding an insufficient financial portfolio and that their ability to pay off the dues. However, in ...