English

Wong sued Keating in an Arkansas state court. Wong has never lived in Arkansas, and none of the events that led to Wong v. Keating happened in Arkansas. The only time Keating has ever set foot on the ground in Arkansas was for 45 minutes while changing planes at the Little Rock airport. The only way for Keating to get to Shreveport, Louisiana, where she had a job interview, was to fly into Little Rock on one flight and then fly from Little Rock to Shreveport on another. During those 45 minutes, while Keating was walking in the airport from her incoming gate to her outgoing gate, a process server, acting on Wong's behalf, served Keating with a summons and complaint in Wong v. Keating. Keating moved to dismiss on the ground that Arkansas has no personal jurisdiction over her. Wong claims that service in Arkansas alone gives Arkansas personal jurisdiction over Keating.

Analysis:

Find the components of the paradigm for organizing proof of a conclusion of law. Find the writer's conclusion; the primary rule that supports that conclusion; proof and explanation of that rule; and application of that rule to the facts. Mark up the passage below to show where each of the components occurs. If you can find any counter-analyses or policy discussions, mark them, too. Finally, for each component, address whether the writer has told you enough. Are you confident that the writer is correct? If not, what kinds of additional information would you need? Feel free to add comments on the document identifying the different areas of organizing proof of a conclusion of law.