The State Bar of California - February 2006 Essay 4 (Civil Procedure) lyrics

Pat, a resident of State A, received a letter from Busco, a tour bus company that had been in business for about two months. Busco was incorporated and had its principal place of business in State B. The letter invited Pat to go on a tour of State C at a special introductory price. After Pat sent in her money, Busco sent Pat a tour brochure and ticket. Ed, also a resident of State A, saw an ad that Busco had placed once a week for the last several weeks in Ed's hometown newspaper for the same State C tour. The ad listed a State A telephone number to call for tickets. Ed called the telephone number and ordered and bought a ticket for the same tour as Pat and for the same price. Pat and Ed boarded the tour bus in State B. Upon entering State C, the bus veered off the road and hit a tree. Ed was not hurt, but Pat suffered serious injuries. The tour was canceled. Busco refused to reimburse pa**engers the price of their tickets. Ed sued Busco for breach of contract in state court in State A to recover the price of his ticket. Busco moved to dismiss the suit based on lack of personal jurisdiction. The court denied the motion. After trial, judgment was entered in favor of Ed. Thereafter, Pat sued Busco in state court in State A for breach of contract to recover the price of her ticket and for tort damages for her personal injuries. After Busco filed its answer, Pat filed a motion for summary judgment on both claims on grounds of res judicator and collateral estoppel. The court denied Pat's motion. State A has a long-arm statute that authorizes the exercise of personal jurisdiction over nonresident defendants on any basis not inconsistent with the Constitution of the United States. 1. Did the court rule correctly on Busco's motion to dismiss Ed's suit for lack of personal jurisdiction? Discuss. 2. Did the court rule correctly on Pat's motion for summary judgment on each of her claims on grounds of res judicata and collateral estoppel? Discuss.