Sarah is not a resident of Washington although her website can be accessed by residents of that state. Barbara files a suit against Sarah in a Washington state court. The court is most likely to have jurisdiction over Sarah if Barbara's claim arises from Group of answer choices minimum contacts between Sarah and any Washington resident. substantial business between Barbara and Sarah through Sarah's website. passive advertising on Sarah's website. the Internet's capacity to bypass boundaries.

Question

whejnekn320 whejnekn320

16-07-2021
Business

Answered

Sarah is not a resident of Washington although her website can be accessed by residents of that state. Barbara files a suit against Sarah in a Washington state court. The court is most likely to have jurisdiction over Sarah if Barbara's claim arises from Group of answer choices minimum contacts between Sarah and any Washington resident. substantial business between Barbara and Sarah through Sarah's website. passive advertising on Sarah's website. the Internet's capacity to bypass boundaries.

Answer :

Other Questions

Explain how government spending can cause demand pull inflation

AbsorbingMan AbsorbingMan · Answer 1 · 2021-07-18T21:34:27-04:00

Answer:

substantial business between Barbara and Sarah through Sarah's website.

Explanation:

A person cannot be brought to the court if the person belongs to some other state than the place where case has been filed against him. A court doe not have any jurisdiction over a person if the person is resident of some other state and the court is in some other state.

In the context, Barbara files a case against Sarah in Washington court. But Sarah is not a resident of Washington. Sarah has a website which can be accessed in Washington. Now the court in Washington can have jurisdiction over Sarah only if the claim of Barbara arises any substantial businesses between Barbara and Sarah through the website of Sarah's.