INTRODUCTION TO LAW:

Lyle was severely injured while on vacation in State F, when the balcony railing on his hotel gave way and he fell some 30 feet to the ground. His domicile prior to the vacation was State T. However, because he was unable to care for himself independently after the accident, he went to a rehabilitation center in State H. He anticipated being in the center for a period of up to two years. However, he kept his home and conducted all of his business through his original address in State T, where he anticipated returning. Lyle hired an attorney who filed suit in State H against the hotel located in State F. In this circumstance, Lyle is only a temporary resident of State H. The defendant has no other connection with State H, nor did the event that prompted the lawsuit occur there. In this situation, the court would likely find that it had insufficient connections to the case to support its exercise of subject matter jurisdiction. Moreover, as even Lyle continued to conduct himself as being domiciled in State T, there would be no personal jurisdiction either.

Point for Discussion: Assume that Lyle had been living in State T at the time of the accident, but moved permanently to State H where his parents lived so they could care for him. Suit was filed in State H. Would this change the outcome?

-YOUR OWN WORDS

-CITE SOURCES