Price v. Superior Court CA3
An Arizona dentist has not answered, demurred, filed a motion to strike, conducted discovery, or performed any acts in this lawsuit for breach of contract, trespass, and conversion other than to challenge the jurisdiction of the California courts. Her lawyers adopted a judicious strategy in their first two motions to quash, challenging only the inadequacy of the service and not the plaintiff’s failure to establish the minimum contacts necessary to acquire personal jurisdiction. After the second motion to quash was denied because the plaintiff belatedly re-served the defendant dentist, she filed a third motion to quash alleging the court did not have personal jurisdiction. The trial court denied the motion on procedural grounds without considering the merits of the jurisdictional challenge. We grant defendant’s petition for a writ of mandate to set aside the order denying the motion to quash, and remand the case to the trial court to determine whether there are the requisite min
Comments on Price v. Superior Court CA3