Air Machine Com SRL v. Superior Court
California Court of Appeal
186 Cal. App. 4th 414, 112 Cal. Rptr.3d 482 (2010)
- Written by Josh Lee, JD
Facts
Ponani Sukumar (plaintiff) and Southern California Stroke Rehabilitation Associates (plaintiff) sued two Italian companies, Air Machine Com SRL (Air Machine) and Panatta Sport SRL (Panatta) (defendants), alleging breach of contract and other causes of action. Sukumar filed the complaint in California state court. Air Machine and Panatta filed a motion to quash the summons, claiming that the case should be dismissed because the California court lacked personal jurisdiction to issue rulings impacting these Italian companies. While the motion to quash was pending, Air Machine and Panatta jointly served a statutory settlement offer on Sukumar. This offer was made pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure § 998 and is often referred to as a 998 offer. The trial court determined that the act of serving the statutory settlement offer constituted a general appearance by Air Machine and Panatta and waived the issue of personal jurisdiction. Air Machine and Panatta then appealed to the California Court of Appeal.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Benke, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 804,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.