This is your fact pattern (i.e., the information you are to work with):

Arthur (from Alabama) is a regional manager for a brand new textbook company, Big Law Publications (incorporated and principal place of business in Connecticut). Arthur's job requires him to travel from school to school to show new casebooks to law professors. His assignment for the first week of February was to visit law schools in Alabama, Georgia, and Florida. While in Florida, Arthur goes to South Beach to have some fun. He ends up getting into a bar fight with Mel, a law student from Miami Beach, Florida. Arthur and Mel each blame the other for starting the fight.

Answer each question separately, and be sure to explain how you reached your conclusion.

Question #1: Arthur (plaintiff) sues Mel (defendant) in Alabama state court for battery. Mel contests personal jurisdiction arguing that the Alabama court does not have jurisdiction over him. Will Mel prevail on his objection to personal jurisdiction? Why or why not?

Question #2: Mel (plaintiff) sues Arthur (defendant) in Florida state court for battery. Arthur contests personal jurisdiction arguing that the Florida court does not have jurisdiction over him because he is not from Florida. Will Arthur prevail on his objection to personal jurisdiction? Why or why not?

For each answer, be sure to identify the facts upon which you rely to conclude why the court does/does not have personal jurisdiction over the defendant.