Using FIRAC then consider this problem:

You have taken a few of Instructors classes and have learned about jurisdiction. You work part-time for a lawyer in Costa Mesa, CA. The lawyer tells you that a client called her and asked if she has a case. He needs you to tell him if he can file a lawsuit for the client in California courts, and wants a one-page memo about it. He tells you that the client may have a great case, but doesn't know laws about jurisdiction, but knows that you have studied them.

The client, a California resident looks for a ticket online for a trip to Argentina, and she wants the adventure dancing the Tango on the streets of Buenos Aires, Argentina. She also wants to travel to Cordoba, Rosario, Salta, and even the ski resort Bariloche, and can do it by train. Online, she sees Ferrocariles Argentinos, the Argentine railway who has Google ads that pop up anywhere in the world when someone enters "Argentine train trip", it then says "Special one month rail pass for US residents only - $299". After seeing it, she buys a ticket online and tells her friend in Arizona to buy one as well, and her friend does buy one. The railway has no offices in California, but they have an advertising agency in Miami that manages the website. Once in Argentina, She leaves Buenos Aires, and while waiting at the Mar del Plata train station, she is standing at the train station, and she watches two trains crash, and she unfortunately is hit by a piece of metal flying from one of the trains, which severely injures her leg. She is devastated, and now can't ski, or tango, and needs a cane to walk.

When she arrives back in the US, she files a lawsuit against the Argentine railway, claiming that they were negligent in the operation of the trains. The railway responds, and claims that they are not subject to the jurisdiction of California courts.

Using the five step process, please tell me how you expect that a court would rule in this case - only on the issue of jurisdiction.

Using the five step process, you will list

FACTS (Focus on relevant facts)

ISSUE (What is the primary issue to be decided)

RULE OF LAW (What is the current rule of law that exists in the area)

APPLICATION (How would the current rule of law be applied to the facts that exist in the case)

CONCLUSION (So, what is the likely ruling in the case. In this section, you might also look at other cases of the court to help you make your ruling)

Remember, a question like this will be decided before there is a finding of negligence. We have not studied negligence, and I am not asking about that. If the Argentine railway is not subject to the jurisdiction of California courts, there will be no trial about negligence. So, limit your answer only to the question of whether the railway will be subject to the jurisdiction of California courts. I am NOT asking you to answer with more than we have studied in class.

HINTS: You often look to other cases or laws you know about a subject to inform yourself on this. So, the lawyer left a note - "look at Nicastro v. JJ McIntyre and OBB v. Sachs (but DON'T worry about the FSIA)"

This is a business law class