Opinion
NO. 2019 CW 1369
01-14-2020
ROOSEVELT WRIGHT v. THE KANSAS CITY SOUTHERN RAILWAY COMPANY
In Re: The Kansas City Southern Railway Company, applying for supervisory writs, 19th Judicial District Court, Parish of East Baton Rouge, No. 679258. BEFORE: WHIPPLE, C.J., GUIDRY, WELCH, LANIER AND BURRIS, JJ.
Judge William J. Burris, retired, serving pro tempore by special appointment of the Louisiana Supreme Court. --------
WRIT GRANTED. The trial court's September 16, 2019 judgment which denied the exception of lack of personal jurisdiction filed by defendant, The Kansas City Southern Railway Company, is reversed. Plaintiff, Roosevelt Wright, as the party asserting that personal jurisdiction is proper, had the initial burden of proving minimum contacts sufficient to give rise to specific personal jurisdiction or to general personal jurisdiction. Crosstex Energy Services, LP v. Texas Brine Co., LLC, 2017-1405 (La. App. 1st Cir. 4/25/18), 253 So.3d 806, 811, writ denied, 2018-0881 (La. 9/28/18), 252 So.3d 919. We find this is a case of general jurisdiction because the injury to plaintiff did not arise from work in or related to defendant's activities in Louisiana. The general jurisdiction inquiry does not focus solely on the magnitude of defendant's in-state contacts, but rather on an appraisal of a corporation's activities in their entirety. BNSF Railway Co. v. Tyrrell, -- U.S. --, 137 S.Ct. 1549, 1559, 198 L.Ed.2d 36 (2017). The facts relied upon by plaintiff herein are more related to his chosen residence in Louisiana than to activities of defendant directed to Louisiana. Plaintiff failed to meet his burden of establishing that defendant's Louisiana contacts are so continuous and systematic as to render it essentially at home in Louisiana. BNSF Railway Co., 137 S.Ct. at 1558. Accordingly, the exception of lack of personal jurisdiction filed by defendant, The Kansas City Southern Railway Company, is granted, and plaintiff's claims against it are dismissed, without prejudice.
JMG
WIL
WJB
Whipple, C.J., and Welch, J., dissent and would deny the writ. COURT OF APPEAL, FIRST CIRCUIT /s/_________
DEPUTY CLERK OF COURT
FOR THE COURT