JERRY WAGNER, J.T.R.
This is an action to recover sums due for medical equipment and services rendered to a number of Massachusetts corporations. On April 6, 2006 all the defendants joined in a motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction, claiming that they did not have sufficient contacts in Connecticut under our longarm statute (General Statutes § 33-129(f)) to justify such jurisdiction.
Plaintiff, a Connecticut corporation, argues that it was initially approached by these defendants to provide the services in question, that defendants over a large period of time placed orders by telephone on a weekly basis to its Connecticut office and the contracts between the parties provided that Connecticut law should apply to any contract disputes.
In a comprehensive decision involving the same plaintiff and another Massachusetts corporation, with virtually identical facts, Judge Tanzer relying on the fact that the defendant had initiated phone contacts with the plaintiff, had and maintained such business relationship over a number of years held that this was sufficient to establish the minimum requirements under our longarm statute. Goldstar v. Berkshire Healthcare Systems, Inc., Superior Court, judicial district of Hartford, CV 04-4006087 (October 25, 2005, Tanzer, J.). She reached that conclusion even though the contact in that case provided that it was to be "governed by, construed and enforced in accordance with the laws of the state of Massachusetts," unlike the present case which provides for application of Connecticut law in construing the contact.
In that case, defendants claim under the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution, also made in the present case, was rejected after a thorough analysis, which concluded that maintenance of the suit in Connecticut "does not offend traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice," which standard is referred to in Thomason v. Chemical Bank, 234 Conn. 281, and cases cited. CT Page 22449
This court adopts the reasoning in Goldstar v. Berkshire Healthcare Systems, Inc., supra and finds there were sufficient contacts in Connecticut for this court to have personal jurisdiction over the defendants in the present case.
Motion to dismiss denied. CT Page 22450