The Law School Authority

Gust v. Flint Case Brief

Summary of Gust v. Flint
257 Ga. 129 (1987)

Facts:  P responded to an ad in D’s magazine to purchase a truck and a trailer from D.  P was a resident of Georgia and D was a Wisconsin corporation.  P claims that D tried to sell a different vehicle to him also refused to return his deposit.  P brought an action for conversion, fraud, and breach of K.  Although D was a national magazine, it did not conduct regular business in Georgia.

Procedure: The appellate court in Flint v. Gust held that Georgia courts had jurisdiction over tort claims but not contract claims.

Issue:  Do Georgia courts have personal jurisdiction over D for tort claims?

Holding: No

Rationale:  The long arm statute requires that the tortious act be taken in Georgia.  Here the D was not present in Georgia and its actions were not taken in Georgia.  Therefore, Georgia courts lack jurisdiction over the defendant.



Copyright © 2001-2012 4LawSchool.com. All rights reserved. Privacy Policy HotChalk Partner