Lexington Ins. Co. v. Hotai Ins. Co., Ltd.

Dist. Ct. did not err in dismissing for lack of personal jurisdiction, plaintiff’s primary insurance company’s action against defendants-two Taiwan insurance companies, where plaintiff sought indemnification for products-liability settlement that plaintiff paid on insured’s behalf for accident that occurred in Texas, where each defendant provided insured with “worldwide” products-liability coverage in agreements with insured. Dist. Ct. could properly find that neither defendant had purposely availed themselves of privilege of conducting business in Wisc., where: (1) neither defendant had solicited insured’s business or targeted Wisc. market; (2) defendants’ agreement were negotiated and drafted in Taiwan with Taiwanese companies; (3) said agreements required that disputes be resolved in Taiwan through use of Taiwan law; and (4) neither defendant visited Wisc. or contacted anyone residing there. Fact that defendants provided “worldwide coverage” or that defendants may be liable to insured did not require different result or establish sufficient contact with state of Wisc. to establish personal jurisdiction over defendants.