Facts: International shoe manufactured footwear in Missouri, but sold its products nationwide. International shoe did not have warehouses in Washington State, but it did send a dozen salespeople there to only take orders.

• Issue: Did International Shoe have sufficient minimum contacts in Washington State to permit jurisdiction there?

A.

No.Supreme Court Reasoning: (1)The complaint failed to contain facts plausibly showing that Ashcroft purposefully adopted a policy of classifying post-September-11 detainees as "of high interest" (2)The complaint does not show that Ashcroft purposefully housed detainees due to their race, religion or national origin. Rule: (1)A pleading must contain a short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader (Iqbal) is entitled to relief. (2) The pleading standard does not require detailed factual allegations. See page 156

- A. B. C. D.

Facts: After 9/11 more than 1,000 people were detained. Many were Arab Muslim men. Iqbal was one of them. He was charged with fraud, imprisoned, abused and ultimately plead guilty. Issue: Did Iqbal's pleadings contain enough information to survive a motion to dismiss?

B.

Yes. Plaintiffs do not offer any facts to suggest that Defendant utilized "high-pressured tactics" or put Plaintiffs under duress or denied Plaintiffs the opportunity to read and understand the Agreement before signing it. Similarly, the fact that student test takers were required to agree to the T&C, including the Arbitration Provision, to sit for the exam does not render the contract one of adhesion (disproportionate bargaining power). Rule: A party who executes a contract is considered bound by its terms, absent a showing of fraud, duress or similar wrongful act by the other contracting party. See page 170

- A. B. C. D.

Facts: The defendant, The College Board (CB), (a billion-dollar company by revenue) owns and administers the SAT, a standardized college entrance exam used by universities around the world. To sit for the SAT, student test takers themselves, not their parents, had to agree to the Terms and Conditions (T&C) of the SAT registration, which contained the arbitration clause on the previous slide. The CB discovered compelling evidence of cheating at the suspect sites. Arbitration Clause All disputes....that relate in any way to registering for or taking the SAT...shall exclusively be resolved by a single arbitrator through binding arbitration, individual arbitration administered by the American Arbitration Association. Unless the parties mutually agree otherwise, the place of the arbitration shall be New York, New York. The parties agree that the Federal Arbitration Act ("FAA") governs this provision. Issue: Was the arbitration clause valid and enforceable?

C.

Yes. The Supreme Court held the activities carried on in the State of Washington were neither irregular nor casual. They were systematic and continuous throughout the years in question. They resulted in a large volume of interstate business, in the course of which the appellant (International Shoe) received the benefits and protection of the laws of the state, including the right to resort to the courts for the enforcement of its rights. Sufficient contacts or ties with the state exist making it reasonable and just, according to our traditional conception of fair play and substantial justice, to permit Washington State to enforce the obligation. See page 147

- A. B. C. D.

Marcia owns a chain of yoga studios and the Lamborghini Roofless pictured to the right. Marcia has sued Mark based on the state common law of negligence. She is testifying in court, explaining how Mark's self driving car slammed into her Lamborghini, causing $82,000 in damages. Marcia is a resident of Washington State. Mark is resident of California. Where would this trial take place?

D.	Here we have Diversity, making this case eligible for Federal District Court. Federal district courts may only hear cases with: Federal Question (Statute or Constitutional Provision) OR Diversity (Parties are from different states and the amount in controversy is $75,000 or higher.) See page 150