Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Craig Campbell v. Spero Electric Corp., 97-4333 (1998)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit Number: 97-4333 Visitors: 64
Filed: Jun. 11, 1998
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT _ No. 97-4333 _ Craig Campbell, * * Plaintiff - Appellant, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the * Western District of Arkansas. Spero Electric Corporation, * * [UNPUBLISHED] Defendant - Appellee. * _ Submitted: May 14, 1998 Filed: June 11, 1998 _ Before BEAM, LOKEN, and MURPHY, Circuit Judges. _ PER CURIAM. This is a diversity action by terminated sales representative Craig Campbell to recover unpaid commissions from
More
United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT ___________ No. 97-4333 ___________ Craig Campbell, * * Plaintiff - Appellant, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the * Western District of Arkansas. Spero Electric Corporation, * * [UNPUBLISHED] Defendant - Appellee. * ___________ Submitted: May 14, 1998 Filed: June 11, 1998 ___________ Before BEAM, LOKEN, and MURPHY, Circuit Judges. ___________ PER CURIAM. This is a diversity action by terminated sales representative Craig Campbell to recover unpaid commissions from Spero Electric Corporation. The parties’ prior ten- year relationship is reflected in a September 6, 1985, letter from Spero’s president addressed to Campbell in Maumelle, Arkansas, and stating, “This letter will officially appoint you as our representative for the state of Oklahoma.” (Emphasis added.) Spero moved to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction, arguing that it did not have the constitutionally requisite minimum contacts with the State of Arkansas. Campbell responded, arguing that the contract with an Arkansas resident was enough, and further asserting without supporting evidence that the contract as performed had included sales in Arkansas and other Arkansas contacts. The district court1 granted the motion to dismiss because Campbell “offers no evidence to support his contentions that [Spero] has transacted business in Arkansas.” Campbell appeals, without first asking the district court to reconsider its decision or otherwise showing that he has, or could obtain through discovery, concrete evidence to support his contention that the contract was partially performed in Arkansas. After careful review of the record, we agree with the district court that this failure of proof is fatal to Campbell’s assertion of personal jurisdiction over Spero in Arkansas. Accordingly, we affirm, except that we modify the dismissal to be without prejudice. See 8th Cir. Rule 47B. A true copy. Attest: CLERK, U. S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT. 1 The HONORABLE JIMM LARRY HENDREN, United States District Judge for the Western District of Arkansas. -2-
Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer