With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". years, however, many state legislatures, including the Rhode Island General Assembly, have abrogated that common law notion by enacting long-arm statutes which expressly provide for jurisdiction over the executor if jurisdiction could have been maintained over the decedent. See Eubank Heights Apartments, Ltd. v. Lebow, 615 F.2d 571, 574 (1st Cir.1980)(concluding that jurisdiction over the decedent’s estate was appropriate if the Texas long-arm statute would have provided jurisdiction over the decedent had he not died); Crosson v. Conlee, 745 F.2d 896, 900-01 (4th Cir.1984)(concluding that the decedent’s contacts with Virginia were sufficient to exercise personal jurisdiction over the foreign executor of the decedent’s estate); Nile v. Nile, 432 Mass. 390, 734 N.E.2d 1153, 1159 (Ma.2000)(<HOLDING>); V.H. v. Estate of Birnbaum, 543 N.W.2d 649,

A: holding that court did not have personal jurisdiction over nonresident defendant where defendant assignee received patents from assignor over whom court had personal jurisdiction in part because the unilateral activity of those who claim some relationship with a nonresident defendant cannot satisfy the requirement of contact with the forum state
B: holding that the massachusetts longarm statute provides for jurisdiction over a nonresident personal representative when the decedent had sufficient contacts with the forum such that the decedent would have been subject to personal jurisdiction had he lived
C: holding that court did not have personal jurisdiction over nonresident defendant because plaintiff failed to show that defendant was assignee of assignor over whom court had personal jurisdiction
D: holding that personal jurisdiction over a party is proper if the party has sufficient minimum contacts with the forum
B.