[Download] "Palen v. Daewoo Motor Co." by In the Court of Appeals of the State of Illinois First District Second Division ~ eBook PDF Kindle ePub Free
eBook details
- Title: Palen v. Daewoo Motor Co.
- Author : In the Court of Appeals of the State of Illinois First District Second Division
- Release Date : January 14, 2005
- Genre: Law,Books,Professional & Technical,
- Pages : * pages
- Size : 72 KB
Description
Plaintiff Betty Palen, as independent executor of the estate of David Palen, deceased, appeals from an order of the circuit court (1) granting defendants Daewoo Motor Company, Ltd. (DMC),1 Daewoo Corporation (Daewoo Corp.),2 Daewoo Group, Daewoo Heavy Industries, Ltd. (Heavy Industries), ""Daewoo FSO Motor SP. z.o.o."" (Daewoo-FSO),3 and Kim Woo-Choong's motions to dismiss plaintiff's complaint for lack of personal jurisdiction and (2) granting defendant Daewoo Motor America, Inc.'s (DMA)4 motion to dismiss based on the doctrine of forum non conveniens. On appeal, plaintiff contends that: (1) the trial court erred in granting Daewoo Corp., Daewoo Group, Heavy Industries, Daewoo-FSO, and Kim Woo-Choong's motion to dismiss plaintiff's complaint because the above entities and individual waived their right to contest personal jurisdiction by serving general interrogatories on plaintiff that sought information not related to their special and limited appearance; (2) personal jurisdiction may be asserted over DMC, Daewoo Corp., Daewoo Group, Heavy Industries, Daewoo-FSO, and Kim Woo-Choong, pursuant to section 2-209(b)(4) of the Illinois Code of Civil Procedure (Code) (735 ILCS 5/2-209(b)(4) (West 2000)), because the above entities and individual are ""doing business"" in Illinois; (3) DMA's motion to dismiss plaintiff's cause of action based on the doctrine of forum non conveniens was untimely as a matter of law; and (4) the trial court abused its discretion in dismissing plaintiff's cause of action based on the doctrine of forum non conveniens. Defendants DMC, Daewoo Corp., Daewoo Group, Heavy Industries, and Kim Woo-Choong cross-appeal, arguing that the trial court erred in denying in part their motion to quash service of summons. For the reasons set forth below, we affirm. STATEMENT OF FACTS