Pearrow v. National Life and Acc. Ins. Co.

Decision Date12 April 1983
Docket NumberNo. 82-1979,82-1979
Citation703 F.2d 1067
PartiesFreddie Pauline PEARROW, Appellant, v. NATIONAL LIFE AND ACCIDENT INSURANCE COMPANY, d/b/a Opryland USA, Appellee.
CourtU.S. Court of Appeals — Eighth Circuit

Charles O. Pearrow, P.A., Bald Knob, Ark., for appellant.

Barber, McCaskill, Amsler, Jones & Hale, Little Rock, Ark., for appellee.

Before HEANEY, McMILLIAN and ARNOLD, Circuit Judges.

McMILLIAN, Circuit Judge.

On April 27, 1979, plaintiff Freddie Pearrow slipped and fell on the floor of the Hospitality Suite at Opryland USA in Nashville, Tennessee. The fall resulted in a broken arm. Pearrow, a resident of Arkansas, sued defendant National Life and Accident Insurance Co. (National), alleging that National owned and operated Opryland and that National's employees at Opryland had negligently waxed the floor, as a result of which Pearrow had fallen and broken her arm. National moved to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction, and the district court 1 granted the motion. For reversal Pearrow argues that the district court had jurisdiction because (1) National has transacted business in Arkansas; and (2) National has appointed the Arkansas Commission of Insurance as its agents for service of process. We affirm.

In order for a court to exercise personal jurisdiction over a foreign corporation, that corporation must have "minimum contacts" with the forum state. International Shoe Co. v. Washington, 326 U.S. 310, 66 S.Ct. 154, 90 L.Ed. 95 (1945). National is registered with the Arkansas Secretary of State as an insurer transacting business and is listed in the Little Rock phone directory. We are willing to assume arguendo that these contacts would be sufficient to meet the requirements of the due process clause. Cf. Weinberg v. Colonial Williamsburg, Inc., 215 F.Supp. 633 (E.D.N.Y.1963). However, the Arkansas long arm statute imposes a further condition: the cause of action against the foreign corporation must have arisen out of the corporation's transaction of business within the state. Martin v. Kelley Electric Co., 371 F.Supp. 1225, 1227-28 (E.D.Ark.1974); Ark.Stat.Ann. Sec. 27-2502.

In Martin, Senior Judge Henley, then Chief Judge of the Eastern District of Arkansas, held that the Arkansas long arm statute required that the plaintiff's injuries must arise from the defendant's Arkansas activities before jurisdiction can be had. 371 F.Supp. at 1227. The plaintiff in Martin, an Arkansas resident, was injured in Missouri by equipment manufactured by the defendant in South Dakota. The defendant had sold other equipment in Arkansas. Judge Henley held that while the sale of equipment in Arkansas would satisfy due process and constitute transacting business, those sales had nothing to do with the plaintiff's injury. Id. at 1228. Because there was no connection between the transaction of business in Arkansas and the cause of action, the complaint was dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. Id. at 1229.

In this case, National conducts insurance business in Arkansas. Clearly, however, Pearrow's arm injury in Tennessee has nothing to do with National's insurance business in Arkansas. National has also, according to Pearrow's complaint, sent brochures into Arkansas soliciting Pearrow to visit Opryland. 2 As a result, Pearrow alleges she went to Opryland where she was injured. This connection is too tenuous. Pearrow's cause of action is for negligence, and it cannot be said that the negligence "arose out of" the solicitation in Arkansas. See Jeanway Industries v. Knudson Manufacturing Co., 533 F.Supp. 678, 682 (W.D.Ark.1981); Krone v. AMI, Inc., 367 F.Supp. 1141, 1143 (E.D.Ark.1973). Because Pearrow's cause of action did not arise out of National's transaction of business in Arkansas, the Arkansas long arm statute does not confer personal jurisdiction over National.

Pearrow also argues that because National appointed the Arkansas Commissioner of Insurance as its agent for service of...

To continue reading

Request your trial
28 cases
  • Moki Mac River Expeditions v. Drugg
    • United States
    • Texas Supreme Court
    • March 2, 2007
    ...Cir.1990); Marino, 793 F.2d at 429-30; Morris v. Barkbuster, Inc., 923 F.2d 1277, 1281 (8th Cir.1991); Pearrow v. Nat'l Life & Accident Ins. Co., 703 F.2d 1067, 1068-69 (8th Cir.1983); Gelfand v. Tanner Motor Tours, 339 F.2d 317, 321-22 (2d Proximate cause requires the defendant's conduct t......
  • Robinson v. Harley-Davidson Motor Co.
    • United States
    • Oregon Supreme Court
    • December 19, 2013
    ...In Myers v. Casino Queen, Inc., 689 F.3d 904 (8th Cir.2012), the court noted that its earlier decision in Pearrow v. National Life & Acc. Ins. Co., 703 F.2d 1067 (8th Cir.1983), had been improperly cited by a circuit court for the proposition that the Eighth Circuit had adopted the substant......
  • Vons Companies, Inc. v. Seabest Foods, Inc.
    • United States
    • California Supreme Court
    • December 12, 1996
    ...but specifically limiting this part of the holding to interpretation of Illinois's long-arm statute]; Pearrow v. National Life & Accident Ins. Co. (8th Cir.1983) 703 F.2d 1067, 1068-1069 [interpreting only Arkansas's long-arm statute, the defendant's out-of-state negligence did not "arise o......
  • Lanier v. American Bd. of Endodontics
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Sixth Circuit
    • June 14, 1988
    ...Cir.1986) (hotel slip and fall accident did not "arise out of" reservation contract and advertisements); Pearrows v. Nat'l Life and Accident Ins. Co., 703 F.2d 1067, 1069 (8th Cir.1983) (theme park's supplying of brochures to forum state plaintiff not sufficiently connected to tort action a......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
1 books & journal articles
  • J. Mcintyre Machinery, Goodyear, and the Incoherence of the Minimum Contacts Test
    • United States
    • University of Nebraska - Lincoln Nebraska Law Review No. 44, 2022
    • Invalid date
    ...Concorde Int'l, C.A., 907 F.2d 1256, 1259-60 (1st Cir. 1990); Marino, 793 F.2d at 429-30; Pearrow v. Nat'l Life and Accident Ins. Co., 703 F.2d 1067, 1068-69 (8th Cir. 1983). These tests are similar and, generally, require that events in the forum be of importance to the substance of the ca......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT