Opinion
J-A03025-18 No. 1231 EDA 2017
03-02-2018
AHMED ISMAIL AND LISA BURROW, HUSBAND AND WIFE Appellant v. VOLVO GROUP NORTH AMERICA, LLC AND NUSS TRUCK GROUP INC.
NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P. 65.37
Appeal from the Order Entered March 30, 2017
In the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County Civil Division at No(s): 161004541 BEFORE: GANTMAN, P.J., McLAUGHLIN, J., and PLATT, J. MEMORANDUM BY McLAUGHLIN, J.:
Retired Senior Judge assigned to the Superior Court. --------
In this appeal, Ahmed Ismail and Lisa Burrow (Appellants) appeal from an Order sustaining Preliminary Objections to the exercise of personal jurisdiction over Appellee Volvo Group North America, LLC (Volvo LLC). We affirm.
The trial court aptly summarized the factual and procedural history of this case in its Pennsylvania Rule of Appellate Procedure 1925(a) Opinion. See Trial Court Opinion, filed Oct. 10, 2017 (1925(a) Op.), at 1-3. Appellants raise one issue in this appeal: "Whether the trial court erred in finding it lacked personal jurisdiction over the Defendant, Volvo, even though Volvo is a sole member LLC and its sole member is a citizen of Pennsylvania[.]" Appellants' Brief at 9. They argue that because Volvo LLC's sole member, Mack Trucks, Inc., is a Pennsylvania corporation, Volvo LLC is essentially at home in Pennsylvania such that general personal jurisdiction is proper here. See Appellants' Brief at 5.
The trial court rejected Appellants' argument. It first reviewed constitutional limitations on the exercise of personal jurisdiction and the presumption against piercing the corporate veil. See 1925(a) Op. at 3-4. It then explained that in order for a limited liability company (LLC) to be subject to personal jurisdiction based on its members' contacts with the forum, a plaintiff would have to present sufficient evidence to merit disregarding the corporate form and treating the LLC and its members as one. Id. at 5-6. Because Appellants had not produced any such evidence, and had instead relied on the mere fact that Mack Trucks, Inc. is a citizen of Pennsylvania to argue that general personal jurisdiction over Volvo LLC was proper, the trial court sustained Volvo LLC's Preliminary Objections and dismissed Appellants' claims against Volvo LLC. Id. at 6.
Our standard of review on appeal from an order sustaining preliminary objections is de novo and our scope of review is plenary. Jones v. Bd. of Dirs. of Valor Credit Union , 169 A.3d 632, 635 (Pa.Super. 2017). We will affirm an order sustaining preliminary objections that results in the denial of a claim or a dismissal of a suit only if the case is free and clear of doubt. Id.
After review of the record, the parties' briefs, and the relevant law, we affirm on the basis of the well-reasoned opinion of the Honorable Ellen H. Ceisler, which we adopt and incorporate herein. See 1925(a) Op. at 3-6.
Order affirmed. Judgment Entered. /s/_________
Joseph D. Seletyn, Esq.
Prothonotary Date: 3/2/18
Image materials not available for display.