Civil Procedure AMP - Personal Jurisdiction

Question 1

For jurisdiction to be valid under a state’s long arm statute, notice of the pending action is required by:

A State statutes

B The Due Process Clause

C The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure

Answer 1

B

For jurisdiction to be valid under a state’s long arm statute, notice of the pending action is required by the Due Process Clause. In addition to the requirement that the defendant have such minimum contacts with the forum to render the exercise of jurisdiction there fair and reasonable, federal due process also requires that a reasonable method be used to notify the defendant of a pending lawsuit so that she may have an opportunity to appear and be heard. Although the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (Rule 4) and state statutes require service using particular methods so that the defendant is notified of the suit, they do not replace the federal constitutional requirement that notice be provided for jurisdiction to be valid. To be constitutional, the method used for service, even if authorized by a federal rule or state statute, must be reasonably calculated to notify the defendant of the pending lawsuit. J0111 Additional Learninga

Question 2

The Federal Rules generally require a federal court to analyze personal jurisdiction:

A As if it were a state court in which it is situated

B Using only federal rules and statutes

C As if it had unlimited jurisdiction over all defendants having a domicile within the United States

Answer 2

A

Under Federal Rule 4, absent some special federal provision, each federal court must analyze personal jurisdiction as if it were a court of the state in which it is situated. Thus, whether a federal court has personal jurisdiction will frequently depend on state law, and whether a state long arm statute authorizes personal jurisdiction. In other words, the court will not use only federal rules and statutes. Since federal borders encompass all states, one might expect that federal courts would encounter problems of personal jurisdiction only when the defendants are foreign nationals. However, Rule 4 dictates otherwise (as explained above); hence, it is not true that a federal court has unlimited jurisdiction over all defendants having a domicile within the United States. J0104A Additional Learning

Question 3

In rem jurisdiction can be invoked over property:

A Anywhere in the world

B Outside the state only

C Within or outside the state

D Within the state only

Answer 3

D

In rem jurisdiction can be invoked over property within the state only. The state has a strong interest in adjudicating the rights of all the world regarding this property. Therefore, the presence of the property in the state is constitutionally sufficient for the exercise of jurisdiction over the property. A court has no in rem power over property outside the state. J0114 Additional Learning

Question 4

In most states, in personam jurisdiction is based on:

A In-state physical presence at the time of service of process, domicile within the state, consent to jurisdiction, or commission of an act falling under the state’s long arm statute

B Service of process anywhere, domicile within the state, consent to jurisdiction, or commission of an act falling under the state’s long arm statute

C Only in-state physical presence at the time of service of process, consent to jurisdiction, or commission of an act falling under the state’s long arm statute

D Only domicile within the state, consent to jurisdiction, or commission of an act falling under the state’s long arm statute

Answer 4

A

Most states have statutes granting their courts in personam jurisdiction in the following situations: (i) When the defendant is physically present in the state and personally served with process therein; (ii) When the defendant is domiciled within the state; (iii) When the defendant consents to jurisdiction; or (iv) When the defendant has committed acts bringing him within the state’s long arm statute. Service of process anywhere is not a basis for exercising personal jurisdiction over a defendant. Note that state long arm statutes will frequently dictate how service of process is to be made out of state. However, the act of serving process out of state, unlike in-state service of process, does not by itself provide the basis for exercising personal jurisdiction. Rather, the long arm act authorizes jurisdiction (frequently with language authorizing out-of-state service of process in certain situations). That jurisdiction is then attached on the defendant by the act of serving process. J0106 Additional Learning

Question 5

With regard to the exercise of personal jurisdiction over a defendant in a civil case in a state, absent consent or waiver, the United States Constitution:

A Requires only that the defendant be provided with notice of the action

B Requires that the defendant have sufficient minimum contacts with the state and be provided with notice of the action

C Requires only that the defendant have sufficient minimum contacts with the state

D Requires nothing; the matter is governed solely by the state long arm statute

Answer 5

B

The Due Process Clause of the United States Constitution places two restrictions on the exercise of personal jurisdiction. First, the defendant must have such contacts with the forum state that the exercise of personal jurisdiction would be fair and reasonable (i.e., the defendant must have sufficient minimum contacts with the jurisdiction). Second, the defendant must be provided with notice of the action such that he may be heard in the case. Of course, the defendant may consent to personal jurisdiction or waive the issue by failing to timely raise it. The state may authorize jurisdiction by enacting a long arm statute. However, it cannot authorize jurisdiction beyond the maximum extent permitted by the Due Process Clause. Thus, it is incorrect to state that the matter is governed solely by the state long arm statute. J0103 Additional Learning

Question 6

Courts look at __________ to determine whether a defendant has such minimum contacts with the forum that the exercise of personal jurisdiction over her would be fair and reasonable.

A Foreseeability, but not purposeful availment

B Either purposeful availment or foreseeability

C Purposeful availment, but not foreseeability

D Both purposeful availment and foreseeability

Answer 6

D

Courts will look at both purposeful availment and foreseeability in determining whether a defendant has such minimum contacts with the forum that the exercise of personal jurisdiction over her would be fair and reasonable. Defendant’s contact with the forum must result from her purposeful availment with that forum. The contacts cannot be accidental. In addition to purposeful availment, the contact requirement of International Shoe requires that it be foreseeable that the defendant’s activities make her amenable to suit in the forum. The defendant must know or reasonably anticipate that her activities in the forum render it foreseeable that she may be “haled into court” there. J0110B Additional Learning

Question 7

In determining whether a defendant has such minimum contacts with the forum that the exercise of personal jurisdiction over her would be fair and reasonable, courts look at:

A Purposeful availment only

B Both purposeful availment and foreseeability

C Either purposeful availment or foreseeability

D Foreseeability only

Answer 7

B

Courts will look at both purposeful availment and foreseeability in determining whether a defendant has such minimum contacts with the forum that the exercise of personal jurisdiction over her would be fair and reasonable. Defendant’s contact with the forum must result from her purposeful availment with that forum. The contacts cannot be accidental. In addition to purposeful availment, the contact requirement of International Shoe requires that it be foreseeable that the defendant’s activities make her amenable to suit in the forum. The defendant must know or reasonably anticipate that her activities in the forum render it foreseeable that she may be “haled into court” there. J0110A Additional Learning

Question 8

A party __________ consent to personal jurisdiction by __________.

A May; express consent only

B May; express consent, implied consent, or voluntary appearance

C May not; voluntary appearance

D May not; implied consent

Answer 8

B

A party may consent to personal jurisdiction by express consent, implied consent, or voluntary appearance. A party’s express consent to the jurisdiction of local courts, whether given before or after suit is commenced, serves as a sufficient basis for in personam jurisdiction. Express consent may be by given by contract or by the appointment of an agent in state to receive service of process. Implied consent arises when the state, as part of a regulatory scheme, appoints a designated state official as the defendant’s agent for receipt of service of process (e.g., a number of states allow the state’s secretary of state to receive service of process for a nonresident motorist under certain circumstances). A defendant may also consent to in personam jurisdiction by filing an appearance without contesting the personal jurisdiction issue. Thus, the answer choice limiting consent to express consent is incorrect, as are the answer choices excluding implied consent and voluntary appearance. J0107B Additional Learning

Question 9

For in rem jurisdiction, the basis of jurisdiction is:

A The presence of the person within or outside the state

B The presence of the property in the state

C The presence of the property within or outside the state

D The presence of the person within the state

Answer 9

B

In in rem actions, the basis of jurisdiction is the presence of the property in the state. The state has a strong interest in adjudicating the rights of all the world regarding this property. Therefore, the presence of the property in the state is constitutionally sufficient for the exercise of jurisdiction over the property. A court has no in rem power over property outside the state. The power of a court over the person of the defendant either within or outside the state is in personam jurisdiction. J0114A Additional Learning

Question 10

Absent consent or waiver, in order for a state to exercise personal jurisdiction over a defendant in a civil case, the Due Process Clause requires that the defendant must:

A Have sufficient minimum contacts with the state and be provided with notice of the action

B Have extensive, ongoing contacts with the state and be provided with notice of the action

C Only be provided with notice of the action

D Only have sufficient minimum contacts with the state

Answer 10

A

In order for a state to exercise personal jurisdiction over a defendant, he must have sufficient minimum contacts with the state, and the defendant must be provided with notice of the action such that he may be heard in the case. Of course the defendant may consent to personal jurisdiction or waive the issue by failing to timely raise it. The Due Process Clause sets the minimum standard of procedural safeguards. It does not require that the defendant have extensive, ongoing contact with the state; the relevant standard is “sufficient minimum contact.” Extensive and ongoing contacts with the state may be a basis for general jurisdiction over a defendant, but such contacts are not required by due process for the exercise of jurisdiction on a specific cause of action arising from the defendant’s contact with the state. J0103B Additional Learning

Question 11

An unlimited long arm statute __________:

A Authorizes jurisdiction over any person or property in the United States without limitations

B Authorizes jurisdiction over any person or property to the extent that it is constitutionally permissible

C Specifies the situations in which jurisdiction can be exercised

Answer 11

B

An unlimited long arm statute authorizes jurisdiction over any person or property to the extent that it is constitutionally permissible. A long arm statute that authorizes jurisdiction over any person or property in the United States without limitations is not valid; the exercise of jurisdiction must be fair and reasonable under the Due Process Clause of the Constitution. A long arm statute that specifies the situations in which the court can exercise jurisdiction is a limited or specific long arm statute. For example, a typical limited long arm statute will authorize the exercise of personal jurisdiction over a defendant when he commits a tort that causes injury within the jurisdiction. J0108A Additional Learning

Question 12

Absent consent or waiver, in order for the exercise of personal jurisdiction over an out-of-state defendant to be constitutional, the defendant must at least _______.

A Have sufficient minimum contacts with the forum state such that the maintenance of the suit against him does not offend traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice

B Have consented to suit within the forum state

C Be “at home” in the forum state

D Be domiciled in the forum state

Answer 12

A

Absent consent or waiver, in order for the exercise of personal jurisdiction over a defendant to be constitutional, the defendant must at least have sufficient minimum contacts with the forum state such that the maintenance of the suit against him does not offend traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice. Of course, the defendant may consent to personal jurisdiction or waive the issue by failing to timely raise it. Although being domiciled in the forum state and having consented to suit within the forum state are constitutional bases for exercising personal jurisdiction over a defendant, they are not the only methods to exercise personal jurisdiction over an out-of-state defendant. The minimum contacts test represents the “least” basis for exercising personal jurisdiction. The defendant also need not be “at home” in the forum state. The “at home” concept is used to determine whether it is permissible for a court to exercise jurisdiction over a defendant for all causes of action (i.e., general jurisdiction). Specific jurisdiction—jurisdiction for specific acts committed that have an effect in the forum—may be exercised on lesser contacts. J0109 Additional Learning

Question 13

_______ jurisdiction involves the ability of the court to exercise power over a particular defendant or item of property.

A Personal

B Territorial

C Subject matter

D Civil

Answer 13

A

Personal jurisdiction refers to the ability of the court to exercise power over a particular defendant or item of property. Subject matter jurisdiction refers to the power of the court over a particular type of case (e.g., a divorce proceeding). Territorial jurisdiction is sometimes used as a term to describe the geographic area over which a court exercises jurisdiction. Civil jurisdiction refers to the type of cases that a court hears, as compared to criminal jurisdiction, equity jurisdiction, etc. J0101 Additional Learning

Question 14

Most states __________ in personam jurisdiction if the defendant __________.

A Will grant; is served with process anywhere

B Will not grant; is domiciled within the state

C Will not grant; has committed acts bringing him within the state’s long arm statute

D Will grant; is physically present in the state and personally served with process therein

Answer 14

D

Most states have statutes granting their courts in personam jurisdiction in the following situations: (i) When the defendant is physically present in the state and personally served with process therein; (ii) When the defendant is domiciled within the state; (iii) When the defendant consents to jurisdiction; or (iv) When the defendant has committed acts bringing him within the state’s long arm statute. Service of process anywhere is not a basis for exercising personal jurisdiction over a defendant. Note that state long arm statutes will frequently dictate how service of process is to be made out of state. However, the act of serving process out of state, unlike in-state service of process, does not by itself provide the basis for exercising personal jurisdiction. Rather, the long arm act authorizes jurisdiction (frequently with language authorizing out-of-state service of process in certain situations). That jurisdiction is then attached on the defendant by the act of serving process. J0106B Additional Learning

Question 15

_______ jurisdiction is the power of a court over the person of a particular defendant.

A In rem

B Subject matter

C In personam

D Quasi in rem

Answer 15

C

In personam jurisdiction is the power of a court over the person of a particular defendant. In rem jurisdiction refers to the power that a court has to adjudicate the rights of all persons in the world with respect to a particular item or property. Quasi in rem jurisdiction exists most commonly when the court has power to determine whether particular individuals own specific property within the court’s control. The defendant is not bound personally by a judgment when the court exercises quasi in rem jurisdiction. Subject matter jurisdiction involves the court’s power over a particular case. The other choices are types of personal jurisdiction, which refers to the court’s power over a particular defendant or item of property. J0105 Additional Learning

Question 16

What kind of jurisdiction involves the ability of the court to exercise power over a particular defendant or item of property?

A Territorial

B Subject matter

C Civil

DPersonal

Answer 16

D

Personal jurisdiction refers to the ability of the court to exercise power over a particular defendant or item of property. Subject matter jurisdiction refers to the power of the court over a particular type of case (e.g., a divorce proceeding). Territorial and civil jurisdiction are not terms used in this subject area to define personal jurisdiction.Territorial jurisdiction is sometimes used as a term to describe the geographic area over which a court exercises jurisdiction. Civil jurisdiction refers to the type of cases that a court hears, as compared to criminal jurisdiction, equity jurisdiction, etc. J0101A Additional Learning

Question 17

Which of the following is not a basis for in personam jurisdiction?

A Service of process anywhere

B Consent to jurisdiction

C Domicile within the state

D Physical presence in the state and personal service while present

Answer 17

A

Service of process anywhere is not a basis for exercising personal jurisdiction over a defendant. Note that state long arm statutes will frequently dictate how service of process is to be made out of state. However, the act of serving process out of state, unlike in-state service of process, does not by itself provide the basis for exercising personal jurisdiction. Rather, the long arm act authorizes jurisdiction (frequently with language authorizing out-of-state service of process in certain situations). That jurisdiction is then attached on the defendant by the act of serving process. Most states have statutes granting their courts in personam jurisdiction in the following situations: (i) When the defendant is physically present in the state and personally served with process therein; (ii) When the defendant is domiciled within the state; (iii) When the defendant consents to jurisdiction; or (iv) When the defendant has committed acts bringing him within the state’s long arm statute. J0106A Additional Learning

Question 18

In state court and frequently in federal court (absent consent or waiver), personal jurisdiction _______ limited by _______.

A Is; state statutes and the Due Process Clause of the U.S. Constitution

B Is not; state statutes or state venue rules

C Is not; the Due Process Clause of the U.S. Constitution

D Is; state statutes, state venue rules, and the Due Process Clause of the U.S. Constitution

Answer 18

A

Personal jurisdiction is limited by both state statutes and the Due Process Clause of the U.S. Constitution. States have the power to decide over whom their courts may exercise personal jurisdiction. Additionally, even if the state statute authorizes personal jurisdiction over a particular defendant, the exercise of personal jurisdiction also must not offend the Due Process Clause of the U.S. Constitution. To be constitutional, the defendant must have sufficient minimum contacts with the state such that the exercise of personal jurisdiction would be fair and reasonable. Of course, the defendant may consent to personal jurisdiction or waive the issue by failing to timely raise it. Under the Federal Rules, a federal court generally must analyze the personal jurisdiction issue as if it were a state court sitting in the jurisdiction. There are exceptions, however. An impleaded party or a party needed for just adjudication is subject to personal jurisdiction if served within a judicial district within the United States and not more than 100 miles from where the summons was issued. Furthermore, personal jurisdiction may be authorized by federal statute. Personal jurisdiction is not limited by state venue rules. Venue relates to the proper geographic district in which to bring the action and does not affect the jurisdiction of the courts. J0102B Additional Learning

Question 19

This type of jurisdiction exists when the court has power to adjudicate the rights of all persons in the world with respect to a particular item of property.

A In personam

B Both quasi in rem and in rem

C In rem

D Quasi in rem

Answer 19

C

In rem jurisdiction exists when the court has the power to adjudicate rights of all persons with respect to property located in the state. An in rem action binds the property that was the subject of the disposition, but not the parties personally. Quasi in rem jurisdiction permits a court without in personam jurisdiction to determine certain disputes between a plaintiff and defendant regarding property when the property is located in the forum state. Unlike in rem jurisdiction, however, it does not permit the court to determine the rights of all persons in the world with respect to the property. In personam jurisdiction exists when the forum has power over the person of a particular defendant. (Jurisdiction over a plaintiff is generally not an issue because the plaintiff accedes to the court’s jurisdiction by bringing suit in that court.) In these cases, the court may render a money judgment against the defendant or may order the defendant to perform acts or refrain from acting. Such a judgment creates a personal obligation on the defendant and is entitled to full faith and credit in all other states. J0113A Additional Learning

Question 20

Consent to personal jurisdiction may be by means of:

A Express consent, but not implied consent or voluntary appearance

B Express consent, implied consent, or voluntary appearance

C Express consent or voluntary appearance, but not implied consent

Answer 20

B

Consent to personal jurisdiction may be means of express consent, implied consent, or voluntary appearance. A party’s express consent to the jurisdiction of local courts, whether given before or after suit is commenced, serves as a sufficient basis for in personam jurisdiction. Express consent may be by given by contract or by the appointment of an agent in state to receive service of process. Implied consent arises when the state, as part of a regulatory scheme, appoints a designated state official as the defendant’s agent for receipt of service of process (e.g., a number of states allow the state’s secretary of state to receive service of process for a nonresident motorist under certain circumstances). A defendant may also consent to in personam jurisdiction by making a voluntary appearance without contesting the personal jurisdiction issue. Thus, the answer choice limiting consent to express consent is incorrect, as is the answer choice excluding implied consent. J0107 Additional Learning

Question 21

The most common type of quasi in rem jurisdiction involves:

A A dispute between parties when neither party has property within the state

B A dispute between parties unrelated to a party’s property within the state

C A dispute between parties over their rights in property within the state

Answer 21

C

There are two types of quasi in rem jurisdiction. The first type (the most common type) involves a dispute between parties over their rights in property within the state. The second type involves a dispute unrelated to a party’s property within the state and has been severely limited by the Supreme Court. In quasi in rem cases, the plaintiff is unable to obtain personal jurisdiction over the defendant, but the defendant has property in the state that the plaintiff attaches. The court then adjudicates the dispute between the parties on the basis of its power over the property. Because the court’s sole basis of jurisdiction is the property, any judgment against the defendant can be satisfied only out of that property. A dispute between parties when neither party has property within the state is not based on quasi in rem jurisdiction; it would be based on in personam jurisdiction as long as minimum contacts requirements are satisfied. J0115A Additional Learning

Question 22

In state court and frequently in federal court (absent consent or waiver), personal jurisdiction is limited by:

A State statutes and the Due Process Clause of the U.S. Constitution

B State statutes, the Due Process Clause of the U.S. Constitution, and state venue rules

C State statutes only

D The Due Process Clause of the U.S. Constitution only

Answer 22

A

Looking at state statutes (particularly the state’s long arm statutes, which authorize jurisdiction over nonresidents of the state in certain circumstances) is the first step to determine if personal jurisdiction is authorized. States have the power to decide over whom their courts may exercise personal jurisdiction. Additionally, even if the state statute authorizes personal jurisdiction over a particular defendant, the exercise of personal jurisdiction also must not offend the Due Process Clause of the U.S. Constitution. To be constitutional, the defendant must have sufficient minimum contacts with the state such that the exercise of personal jurisdiction would be fair and reasonable. Of course, the defendant may consent to personal jurisdiction or waive the issue by failing to timely raise it. Under the Federal Rules, a federal court generally must analyze the personal jurisdiction issue as if it were a state court sitting in the jurisdiction. There are exceptions, however. An impleaded party or a party needed for just adjudication is subject to personal jurisdiction if served within a judicial district within the United States and not more than 100 miles from where the summons was issued. Furthermore, personal jurisdiction may be authorized by federal statute. State venue rules do not affect the jurisdiction of the courts. Venue relates to the proper geographic district in which to bring the action. J0102 Additional Learning

Question 23

For a defendant to have such minimum contacts with the forum that the exercise of personal jurisdiction over him would be fair and reasonable, the court must find that:

A He purposefully availed himself of that forum and it was foreseeable that his activities would make him amenable to suit in the forum

B Only that it was foreseeable that his activities would make him amenable to suit in the forum

C He purposefully availed himself of that forum or it was foreseeable that his activities would make him amenable to suit in the forum

D Only that he purposefully availed himself of that forum

Answer 23

A

For a defendant to have such minimum contacts with the forum that the exercise of personal jurisdiction over him would be fair and reasonable, the court must find that he purposefully availed himself of that forum AND it was foreseeable that his activities would make him amenable to suit in the forum. Defendant’s contact with the forum must result from his purposeful availment with that forum. The contacts cannot be accidental. In addition to purposeful availment, the contact requirement of International Shoe requires that it be foreseeable that the defendant’s activities make him amenable to suit in the forum. The defendant must know or reasonably anticipate that his activities in the forum render it foreseeable that he may be “haled into court” there. J0110 Additional Learning