Your long arm statute in Penna must be a little more liberal than here in Connecticut. We can not sue a foreign defendant in small claims court unless he owns property here in Connecticut, and that gives the plaintiff in rem jurisdiction only...meaning that satisfaction of the judgment is limited to the defendant's Connecticut property.

The alternative is to sue the foreign defendant in Superior Court, and rely on Connecticut's long arm statute and the minimum contacts test. In which case the defendant is required to enter the state to do business. In Connecticut's case negotiating a contract over the phone or fax while the defendant is located in another state does not satisfy the test. I have seen crest fallen attorneys leaving the court house after their cases were dismissed for lack of jurisdiction on this point. They should have researched the case law better. Must be tough to explain to their clients. The rule is a little more liberal in tort suits than in contract suits.

As far as Connecticut residents are concerned they usually have to sue in the defendant's state of domicile. However , most of the complaints I have seen on SOT about nonpayment usually involve several thousand dollars. As such I would think it would be worth traveling to the other state where the problem most likely could be resolved in the defendant's small claims court...no attorney necessary, low filing fee, easy to execute on the judgment against the defendant bank account, real estate, wages , etc.

I can not understand why it would be necessary to have a written contract in order to sue unless the forum state had some weird variation on the UCC in which the requirement of a written contract for the sale of goods over a certain dollar amount had also been extended to services. Other than that I am having some difficulty understanding this. The requirement of a written contract would seem to negate several centuries of contract law providing for alternate legal and equitable remedies.

Most of the time it is not necessary to go to trial. Very often serving the defendant with the summons is enough to get him to pay the abstractor. In other cases the defendant is defaulted for failure to appear or to respond to the summons and complaint...in which case Connecticut's  small claims court will enter judgment on the strength of the plaintiff's written affidavit of debt rather than a trial or hearing in damages. The courts of other states most likely have similar procedures. The point is that the legal system is not that complicated. to post a reply: login - or - register