This is an INCORRECT answer

The short answer is since A owns real estate in State B, there is Quasi-in-rem jurisdiction to sue A in the state court of State B. But the recovery will be limited to the value of the property A owns in State B.

Of course, there is a possibility to use long arm statute of State B to sue A in State B.

And I do not think A can be sued in federal district court in state B, because the disputed amount is no larger than 75000 dollars and it appears that there is no federal question in this case

所有跟帖： 

• I thought quasi-in-rem jurisdiction is gone -caliber- ♂ (127 bytes) () 02/11/2009 postreply 08:56:03

• here's a link to prove my point -caliber- ♂ (104 bytes) () 02/11/2009 postreply 15:11:26

• 回复：here's a link to prove my point -sjy0627- ♂ (699 bytes) () 02/11/2009 postreply 17:43:30

• ok, now we are back to square 1 again -caliber- ♂ (777 bytes) () 02/11/2009 postreply 20:56:15

• 回复：ok, now we are back to square 1 again -sjy0627- ♂ (619 bytes) () 02/11/2009 postreply 21:21:07