Continental Ins. Co. v. Miller Yacht Sales, No. 356087 (Jul. 11, 1991)
Opinion of the Court
The complaint alleges that the defendant manufactured a defective boat which the plaintiff Edward Jarson, a resident of this state1, purchased. The plaintiffs claim damages for losses alleged to have been caused by the defective design and manufacture. The plaintiff's affidavit establishes that the defendant, through its sales representatives, repeatedly solicited sales at boat shows in Connecticut, including the sale of the boat in question. Although the sale was consummated in New Jersey, the defendant's activities, as described in the plaintiff's affidavit, cause this court to conclude that the defendant manufactured the boat "with the reasonable expectation that [it] would be used or consumed in this state," as provided in C.G.S. 33-411 (c)(3). Accordingly, the court holds that that long-arm statute applies to the circumstances of this case and confers jurisdiction over the defendant.
The court also concludes that the application of Connecticut's long-arm statute in this case would not offend constitutional due process requirements. The defendant must reasonably have expected that its goods would enter the stream of commerce in this state and that it would be "haled into court" here if they were defective. See World-Wide Volkswagen v. Woodson,
For all of the above reasons, the defendant's motion to dismiss is denied.
MALONEY, J.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.