Cook County Circuit Court Denies Personal Jurisdiction Motion In Asbestos Case

by Husch Blackwell LLP
Contact

The Circuit court in Cook County, Illinois has recently clarified one of the limitations on which it applies personal jurisdiction and venue protections to Defendants in asbestos cases. In John C. Clark v. A.W. Chesterton Company, et al., the Court performed personal jurisdictional analyses of general and specific jurisdiction, and also analyzed Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss for forum non conveniens. While the Defendant in this case won the argument on general jurisdiction, it lost the arguments on specific jurisdiction and forum non conveniens. The court reasoned that Plaintiff’s “take-home” exposure to asbestos brought both the Defendant’s actions and the alleged resulting injury into Illinois.

The Plaintiff in Clark alleged exposure to asbestos on the premises of Great River Energy’s (“GRE”) factory in North Dakota, while working as a contractor.  Significantly, the Plaintiff also alleged “take-home” exposure in his pleadings and argument, although the Court’s opinion provided no underlying facts regarding this claim, and there is no spouse or second Plaintiff named in the case. The contracting company for which Plaintiff worked was an Illinois company – United Conveyor Corporation (“UCC”), who had contracted with GRE to do the work on GRE’s premises.  Plaintiff lived in Cook County, Illinois.  Plaintiff alleged that the fact that GRE had contracted with an Illinois corporation was enough to subject GRE to personal jurisdiction.  However, the Court acknowledged Defendant’s argument that the contract alone was not enough to show “minimum contacts” between GRE and Illinois, and that, under Illinois law, other factors must be considered.

In reviewing whether there was general jurisdiction over GRE, the Court applied the requirements set forth by the U.S. Supreme Court in Daimler A.G. v. Bauman, 134 S.Ct. 746 (2014) and adopted in Illinois by Aspen Am. Ins. Co. v. Interstate Warehousing, Inc., 2017 IL 121281. The Circuit Court thus found that Defendant GRE was not “at home” in Illinois because it was not incorporated there, did not have a principal place of business there, and did not “meet the example of a rare exception.”  As a result, the Court did not have general jurisdiction over Defendant GRE.

The Circuit Court next reviewed whether there was specific jurisdiction over GRE, and looked to the Illinois Supreme Court case of Russell v. SNFA, 2013 IL 113909 for the proposition that “[a]lthough the United States Supreme Court has not clarified what is meant by ‘arising out of’ or ‘relating to’ in the context of a jurisdiction question, Illinois has determined that the applicable standard is lenient or flexible.” [1]

The Cook County Circuit Court also cited to Bolger v. Nautica Int’l, Inc., 369 Ill. App. 3d 947 (2d Dist. 2007) to explain the factors to consider in determining whether a Defendant has “purposefully availed” itself of the benefits of the forum state, beyond simply contracting with a business located there: (1) who initiated the transaction, (2) where the contract was formed, and (3) where the contract was performed.   Significantly, the appellate court in Bolger began its specific jurisdiction analysis by stating “….The focus is on the defendant’s activities within the forum State, not on those of the plaintiff,” before articulating the three factors to consider when a contract forms the basis for the jurisdictional dispute.

However, without going through an analysis of specific application of these Bolger factors to the facts at issue in Clark, the Circuit Court determined that “GRE (through its predecessor) and this Illinois resident’s Illinois employer contracted in and agreed to be bound by Illinois law and courts.  This choice of forum was explicit and bargained for by experienced and sophisticated business parties.  Moreover, plaintiff’s proposed injury directly arose from Defendant’s own contacts with Illinois through alleged exposure to Defendant’s asbestos both at its facility [which was in North Dakota] and again in Chicago when he brought the asbestos fibers home” (emphasis added).  By considering the “take-home” exposure by Plaintiff in addition to the other named factors, the Circuit Court also concluded that Illinois courts would have “concern for a case where the Defendant allegedly allowed people working on its premises and around asbestos containing products to travel back to Illinois without proper safety precautions in place to disrupt exposures back home, and that a dismissal would result in Plaintiff’s having to ‘commence separate lawsuits in several states where he worked and was exposed’ thus finding that it was also “reasonable to litigate this case in Illinois.”

Having found personal jurisdiction over GRE, the Circuit Court turned to the Defendant’s argument regarding forum non conveniens. Because the Court found that part of the Plaintiff’s injury occurred in Cook County, Illinois (via take-home exposures), the court applied that finding in both the private and public interest factor analyses, and determined that they weighed in favor of keeping the case in Illinois.

The Circuit Court’s extensive consideration of Plaintiff’s alleged take-home exposure in this way is significant to Defendants in several ways.  First “take-home” exposure in asbestos cases takes on new meaning ordinarily reserved for family members who were not working at the jobsite at issue, opening the door for potential liability for additional exposure by the Plaintiff’s own actions once he is at home.  Second, from a jurisdictional standpoint, a finding that take-home exposure from a Defendant’s premises in another state constitutes a Defendant’s relationship to that forum State will limit a Defendant’s ability (in asbestos exposure claims) to argue against specific jurisdiction in any state in which a Plaintiff lives.  The consideration of Plaintiff’s exposure once he gets home also arguably shifts the focus from the Defendant’s activities (as stated by the Illinois appellate court in Bolger) to those of the Plaintiff.


[1] The Circuit Court made no mention of the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Walden v. Fiore, 134 S.Ct. 1115 (2014) (decided shortly after Daimler), wherein the relationship between the defendant and the forum state was analyzed for minimum contacts under a specific jurisdiction inquiry.  The Court in Walden identified two necessary factors: 1) “the relationship must arise out of contacts that the ‘defendant himself’ creates with the forum State” and 2) “our ‘minimum contacts’ analysis looks to the defendant’s contacts with the forum State itself, not the defendant’s contacts with persons who reside there” (emphasis in original). Id.

DISCLAIMER: Because of the generality of this update, the information provided herein may not be applicable in all situations and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations.

© Husch Blackwell LLP | Attorney Advertising

Written by:

Husch Blackwell LLP
Contact
more
less

Husch Blackwell LLP on:

Readers' Choice 2017
Reporters on Deadline

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
Sign up using*

Already signed up? Log in here

*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
Custom Email Digest
Privacy Policy (Updated: October 8, 2015):
hide

JD Supra provides users with access to its legal industry publishing services (the "Service") through its website (the "Website") as well as through other sources. Our policies with regard to data collection and use of personal information of users of the Service, regardless of the manner in which users access the Service, and visitors to the Website are set forth in this statement ("Policy"). By using the Service, you signify your acceptance of this Policy.

Information Collection and Use by JD Supra

JD Supra collects users' names, companies, titles, e-mail address and industry. JD Supra also tracks the pages that users visit, logs IP addresses and aggregates non-personally identifiable user data and browser type. This data is gathered using cookies and other technologies.

The information and data collected is used to authenticate users and to send notifications relating to the Service, including email alerts to which users have subscribed; to manage the Service and Website, to improve the Service and to customize the user's experience. This information is also provided to the authors of the content to give them insight into their readership and help them to improve their content, so that it is most useful for our users.

JD Supra does not sell, rent or otherwise provide your details to third parties, other than to the authors of the content on JD Supra.

If you prefer not to enable cookies, you may change your browser settings to disable cookies; however, please note that rejecting cookies while visiting the Website may result in certain parts of the Website not operating correctly or as efficiently as if cookies were allowed.

Email Choice/Opt-out

Users who opt in to receive emails may choose to no longer receive e-mail updates and newsletters by selecting the "opt-out of future email" option in the email they receive from JD Supra or in their JD Supra account management screen.

Security

JD Supra takes reasonable precautions to insure that user information is kept private. We restrict access to user information to those individuals who reasonably need access to perform their job functions, such as our third party email service, customer service personnel and technical staff. However, please note that no method of transmitting or storing data is completely secure and we cannot guarantee the security of user information. Unauthorized entry or use, hardware or software failure, and other factors may compromise the security of user information at any time.

If you have reason to believe that your interaction with us is no longer secure, you must immediately notify us of the problem by contacting us at info@jdsupra.com. In the unlikely event that we believe that the security of your user information in our possession or control may have been compromised, we may seek to notify you of that development and, if so, will endeavor to do so as promptly as practicable under the circumstances.

Sharing and Disclosure of Information JD Supra Collects

Except as otherwise described in this privacy statement, JD Supra will not disclose personal information to any third party unless we believe that disclosure is necessary to: (1) comply with applicable laws; (2) respond to governmental inquiries or requests; (3) comply with valid legal process; (4) protect the rights, privacy, safety or property of JD Supra, users of the Service, Website visitors or the public; (5) permit us to pursue available remedies or limit the damages that we may sustain; and (6) enforce our Terms & Conditions of Use.

In the event there is a change in the corporate structure of JD Supra such as, but not limited to, merger, consolidation, sale, liquidation or transfer of substantial assets, JD Supra may, in its sole discretion, transfer, sell or assign information collected on and through the Service to one or more affiliated or unaffiliated third parties.

Links to Other Websites

This Website and the Service may contain links to other websites. The operator of such other websites may collect information about you, including through cookies or other technologies. If you are using the Service through the Website and link to another site, you will leave the Website and this Policy will not apply to your use of and activity on those other sites. We encourage you to read the legal notices posted on those sites, including their privacy policies. We shall have no responsibility or liability for your visitation to, and the data collection and use practices of, such other sites. This Policy applies solely to the information collected in connection with your use of this Website and does not apply to any practices conducted offline or in connection with any other websites.

Changes in Our Privacy Policy

We reserve the right to change this Policy at any time. Please refer to the date at the top of this page to determine when this Policy was last revised. Any changes to our privacy policy will become effective upon posting of the revised policy on the Website. By continuing to use the Service or Website following such changes, you will be deemed to have agreed to such changes. If you do not agree with the terms of this Policy, as it may be amended from time to time, in whole or part, please do not continue using the Service or the Website.

Contacting JD Supra

If you have any questions about this privacy statement, the practices of this site, your dealings with this Web site, or if you would like to change any of the information you have provided to us, please contact us at: info@jdsupra.com.

- hide
*With LinkedIn, you don't need to create a separate login to manage your free JD Supra account, and we can make suggestions based on your needs and interests. We will not post anything on LinkedIn in your name. Or, sign up using your email address.