GOP goes anti-capitalism, tries to block Tesla Motors from selling in N. Carolina

[Fern]

-snip-
EDIT: Regarding serving summons, as I understand it Tesla does maintain a showroom in North Carolina. As an agent of Tesla, they could be served there. Professionals practicing in North Carolina have to maintain cubie offices for much the same reason.

I wasn't thinking of serving summons.

IANAL, but in my own experience I've noticed a few things that may be legally problematic under the direct sale model, with the seller being in CA:

1. The first has to do with "venue". I can't articulate it well so I'll give an example. I was involved in a real estate deal here in Western NC that went under when the economy went bad. An attorney in a large NC city on the eastern side of the state purchased the bad debt from the bank (pennies on the dollar no doubt) and I was sued along with the other partners. I have no problems with defending myself in court but I'll be G.D.'d if I'm traveling across the state missing work and racking up expensive hotel and food bills to do it.

I researched it and found because the business deal was conducted here I could legally demand that they can only sue me in my district. I.e., they had to travel here. So I sent a demand letter to the district court over there with my demand for a change of venue and that was that. They didn't want to come over here either so it was dropped.

Likewise, you buy a car from an out-of-state seller and if the deal is seen as done in CA, you better be prepared to head over there to sue. They'll claim venue over there.

2. Every business contract I've seen, and it's a good deal of them, has always stated which state law it is written under. I certainly expect that if you buy a car from a CA company the contract is going to specify it's under the laws of CA.

3. NC has no jurisdiction over a CA company. I'm not familiar with their NC showroom, whether or not it qualifies as an agent and if it does if that is sufficient presence here to allow one to sue here. Being on the cautious side I'm reluctant to to trust it.

Fern

 

[tynopik]

3. NC has no jurisdiction over a CA company.

you sure about that?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long_arm_jurisdiction
http://www.lrcvaw.org/laws/nclongarm.pdf

 

[teddyv]

Did anyone actually look at the vote?
http://www.ncleg.net/gascripts/vote...ranscript.pl?sSession=2013&sChamber=S&RCS=319

Not one NO vote, from EITHER party.

 

[Attic]

We should have the ability, individual identity, to call something as it is without resorting to herding sheep with the D or R brandishing iron. That is a tactic done to gain power of an argument at the expensive of legitimate debate.

Possibly we could argue about this topic if the OP wasn't as inflammatory. Note to OP, your hate for all things R and/or conservative is your own shackle and you have the audacity to spread that cage like you are doing others a favor.

Things attached to D or R should be valued independently of political rhetoric if anyone here wants to see an improvement in policy making. Playing into the D vs R is simply taking your own power as a citizen and placing it into a pool of corruption (yes both sides).

 

[Wreckem]

I wasn't thinking of serving summons.

IANAL, but in my own experience I've noticed a few things that may be legally problematic under the direct sale model, with the seller being in CA:

1. The first has to do with "venue". I can't articulate it well so I'll give an example. I was involved in a real estate deal here in Western NC that went under when the economy went bad. An attorney in a large NC city on the eastern side of the state purchased the bad debt from the bank (pennies on the dollar no doubt) and I was sued along with the other partners. I have no problems with defending myself in court but I'll be G.D.'d if I'm traveling across the state missing work and racking up expensive hotel and food bills to do it.

I researched it and found because the business deal was conducted here I could legally demand that they can only sue me in my district. I.e., they had to travel here. So I sent a demand letter to the district court over there with my demand for a change of venue and that was that. They didn't want to come over here either so it was dropped.

Likewise, you buy a car from an out-of-state seller and if the deal is seen as done in CA, you better be prepared to head over there to sue. They'll claim venue over there.

2. Every business contract I've seen, and it's a good deal of them, has always stated which state law it is written under. I certainly expect that if you buy a car from a CA company the contract is going to specify it's under the laws of CA.

3. NC has no jurisdiction over a CA company. I'm not familiar with their NC showroom, whether or not it qualifies as an agent and if it does if that is sufficient presence here to allow one to sue here. Being on the cautious side I'm reluctant to to trust it.

Fern

If you are direct selling a product in a state you can be hailed into court in that state to which you are selling.

 

[zinfamous]

my home state is an outright embarrassment these days. Every single god damn article related to legislation coming out of NC for the last several years has been nothing but misguided teabagging dipshitery.

We have a highly educated workforce and tech center, great standards and cost of living, and because of Art motherfuking Pope, managed to put a bunch of gasoline-huffing 24 year-old rednecks in charge of everything.


motherfucking brilliant.

 

[zinfamous]

OP I thought you didn't like Capitalism so what's the problem?


Global warming isn't a problem though.

why do you support the terrorists?

 

[Incorruptible]

my home state is an outright embarrassment these days. Every single god damn article related to legislation coming out of NC for the last several years has been nothing but misguided teabagging dipshitery.

We have a highly educated workforce and tech center, great standards and cost of living, and because of Art motherfuking Pope, managed to put a bunch of gasoline-huffing 24 year-old rednecks in charge of everything.


motherfucking brilliant.

The only embarrassment is you for attacking the Tea Party, they support the Constitution.

 

[zinfamous]

The only embarrassment is you for attacking the Tea Party, they support the Constitution.

why do you support terrorists?

 

[Incorruptible]

why do you support terrorists?

why do you support terrorists?

 

[werepossum]

I wasn't thinking of serving summons.

IANAL, but in my own experience I've noticed a few things that may be legally problematic under the direct sale model, with the seller being in CA:

1. The first has to do with "venue". I can't articulate it well so I'll give an example. I was involved in a real estate deal here in Western NC that went under when the economy went bad. An attorney in a large NC city on the eastern side of the state purchased the bad debt from the bank (pennies on the dollar no doubt) and I was sued along with the other partners. I have no problems with defending myself in court but I'll be G.D.'d if I'm traveling across the state missing work and racking up expensive hotel and food bills to do it.

I researched it and found because the business deal was conducted here I could legally demand that they can only sue me in my district. I.e., they had to travel here. So I sent a demand letter to the district court over there with my demand for a change of venue and that was that. They didn't want to come over here either so it was dropped.

Likewise, you buy a car from an out-of-state seller and if the deal is seen as done in CA, you better be prepared to head over there to sue. They'll claim venue over there.

2. Every business contract I've seen, and it's a good deal of them, has always stated which state law it is written under. I certainly expect that if you buy a car from a CA company the contract is going to specify it's under the laws of CA.

3. NC has no jurisdiction over a CA company. I'm not familiar with their NC showroom, whether or not it qualifies as an agent and if it does if that is sufficient presence here to allow one to sue here. Being on the cautious side I'm reluctant to to trust it.

Fern

That's a valid point. I think though that the REAL reason is to keep as many Tesla bucks as possible in North Carolina. I have no problem with that motivation, as long as it maintains Constitutionality.

Did anyone actually look at the vote?
http://www.ncleg.net/gascripts/vote...ranscript.pl?sSession=2013&sChamber=S&RCS=319

Not one NO vote, from EITHER party.

You, sirrah, have officially pwned the thread, and I genuflect in your general direction.

Except of course for the OP, who clearly has pwned himself.

If you are direct selling a product in a state you can be hailed into court in that state to which you are selling.

I think his point was that the contract would have to be adjudicated under California law, not North Carolina law. You can always serve someone if you want it badly enough, but having the case heard in your jurisdiction is a bit more difficult, and having it judged within NC law much more so.

 

[Gintaras]

why do you support terrorists?

Why do you pay an attention to what some fool keeps repeating - same sentence to different quotes.

 

[Matt1970]

Did anyone actually look at the vote?
http://www.ncleg.net/gascripts/vote...ranscript.pl?sSession=2013&sChamber=S&RCS=319

Not one NO vote, from EITHER party.

/another GOP bashing thread.

 

[tynopik]

I think his point was that the contract would have to be adjudicated under California law, not North Carolina law.

I don't think it works that way.

NC's long-arm statue means NC has jurisdiction, which means THEIR LAWS apply. You're not going to get NC courts to try to apply California law. They don't care what California law is.

 

[Jaepheth]

Buggy whip manufacturing jobs benefit the economy and therefore must be protected by law.

 

[drebo]

I'm 100% opposed to the gop on this. The forced 3rd party intermediary model is archaic and serves no legitimate purpose anymore.

It works for Obamacare, so why not for auto dealerships?!

RIGHT?!