Question

Fancy Frames Bicycles, Inc. is a small company in State A that manufactures custom high end bicycle frames for sale to consumer cyclists. They have a single office/plant but they maintain a web site with information about their products with contact information, but no ability to order products on-line. Mike, a State B resident runs a similar custom bicycle frame making shop that is successful but growing increasingly stagnant. After visiting the Fancy Frames site he is impressed. He has contacted Fancy Frames about closing his business and becoming a local manufacturer and distributor for them. Fancy Frames is intrigued by the idea and the parties have exchanged numerous e-mails for over a year discussing the proposed business relationship. Finally Fancy Frames writes to Mike that the deal is a go and the papers will be sent to him immediately. Mike closes his business and awaits the papers. When they arrive he sees that the deal provides him with a salary but has left out the commission that the e-mails had promised. He sues Fancy Frames in the State B District Court. Will the court have personal jurisdiction over Fancy Frames? What theory or theories might the court examine in determining personal jurisdiction?

Answer

This answer is hidden. It contains 1002 characters.