Business, Legal & Accounting Glossary
Adam v. Saenger, 303 U.S. 59 (1938), is a civil procedure case in which the Supreme Court held that a plaintiff who brings an action against a defendant in a state court subjects himself to personal jurisdiction of that court with respect to any counterclaim.
Beaumont Export, a Texas corporation, filed suit in California Superior Court against Montes, who filed a cross-complaint on the plaintiff’s attorney. Beaumont’s complaint was dismissed, Montes won by default judgment, so Montes assigned judgment to Adam. Adam filed a lawsuit in Texas to collect against Saenger, to whom Beaumont had sold its business. The Texas court found that Beaumont was not doing business in California at the time of the lawsuit.
Whether Beaumont is subject to California jurisdiction.
Yes. Beaumont submitted itself to California jurisdiction by taking the suit to California in the first place, and so submitted itself to any cross-complaint that might arise from the first suit. If you consent to one part of the litigation, you consent to all the litigation.
To help you cite our definitions in your bibliography, here is the proper citation layout for the three major formatting styles, with all of the relevant information filled in.
Definitions for Adam v. Saenger are sourced/syndicated and enhanced from:
This glossary post was last updated: 8th October, 2021 | 0 Views.