Thanks for visiting! Welcome to a new way to research case law. You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation and good law / bad law checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.
Drivecon Corp. v. HOIST & CRANE SERVICE GROUP
Citations: 196 F. Supp. 2d 688; 2001 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 17858; 2001 WL 1338998Docket: 01 C 6969
Court: District Court, N.D. Illinois; October 29, 2001; Federal District Court
The case involves a commercial dispute between Drivecon Corporation and Hoist Crane Service Group, under the jurisdiction of the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois. The court reviewed a motion by Plant Mechanical, a division of Hoist, to dismiss Drivecon's action based on lack of personal jurisdiction. Plant Mechanical had previously faced a similar dismissal motion in Louisiana. The court denied Plant Mechanical's motion, emphasizing that its activities outside Illinois subjected it to jurisdiction based on Illinois long-arm statutes. Key precedents, such as Ruprecht Co. v. Sysco Food Servs. of Seattle, established that an out-of-state purchaser can be subject to Illinois jurisdiction if it actively dictates the terms of its purchases from an Illinois seller. The court concluded that Plant Mechanical falls into the "active purchaser" category, justifying the exercise of jurisdiction. Consequently, Plant Mechanical was ordered to file its answer to Drivecon's complaint by November 9, 2001. The court also noted the complexities of Illinois personal jurisdiction law and its evolution over time, referencing earlier case law to support its ruling.