Colorado Court Dismisses Case for Lack of Jurisdiction

NB's clients, a California corporation and two of its principals, were sued in Denver, Colorado by a Colorado corporation alleging that NB's clients stole "trade secret" information. While NB's clients certainly had substantive defenses to the claims, NB believed the Colorado court did not have "personal jurisdiction" over NB's clients.

Personal jurisdiction is the ability of a court to exert its authority over, and render an enforceable judgment against, an individual or a company. When an out-of-state defendant is sued and an objection raised, a court must determine whether it has jurisdiction over the defendant. The question is essentially one of "due process" and fairness: should the defendant have reasonably expected to be haled into court in that state based on his or her actions or other circumstances? Or as Supreme Court Justice Harlan Stone put it: would the assertion of jurisdiction over the defendant "offend traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice"?

Based on legal precedent, testimony, and documentary evidence, NB was able to convince the Colorado trial court that Colorado did not have jurisdiction over NB's clients and the case was dismissed. "This case points up the fact that many times, there is more than one way to skin a cat, with respect to defending a lawsuit," commented lead counsel, Michael Battin. "We were able to save the clients thousands of dollars in defending an entire case in Colorado by challenging the matter on a procedural issue."