Personal Jurisdiction

Question 1

what is SMJ?

Answer 1

• court’s power to hear the type of case

- typically federal courts and state courts SMJ is concurrent

Question 2

three types of federal SMJ

Answer 2

(1) federal question (arising under jurisdiction)
(2) diversity jurisdiction
(3) supplemental jurisdiction

Question 3

in personam jurisdiction

Answer 3

(1) a court’s jurisdiction over a person or entity

(2) authority of the court over an individual or entity that allows the court to order that person to appear and comply

Question 4

in rem jurisdiction

Answer 4

(1) jurisdiction over the thing that is contested in the action. cause of action arises from property.
(2) power of court to determine ownership and interests in property located within court’s territorial jurisdiction
(3) action against property is within court’s in rem jurisdiction
(4) affects all persons who might have an interest in the property

Question 5

Three ways Supreme Court said Oregon state court could satisfy PJ in Pennoyer v. Neff

Answer 5

(1) in rem jurisdiction
(2) in personam jurisdiction
(3) D must consent to state courts’ jurisdiction

Question 6

quasi in rem jurisdiction

Answer 6

(1) an action against a person’s property in order to acquire jurisdiction over the person
(2) allows a court to gain PJ over absent party that has interest in the property within the jurisdiction even though the court otherwise could not attain PJ over that person
(3) must seize at outset (Pennoyer) to use as jurisdictional basis - “reasonably calculated” test of notice

Question 7

personal jurisdiction

Answer 7

court’s power over the parties to the case

Question 8

Shaffer v Heitner

Answer 8

quasi in rem jurisdiction may only be asserted when the interests of the persons in the property seized have sufficient contacts, ties, or relations to the state.

Question 9

specific jurisdiction

Answer 9

• when the legal cause of action is directly tied to the entity’s contacts with the forum state, then exercise of jurisdiction over entity is considered fair and appropriate
• considered in minimum contacts test only

Question 10

Int’l Shoe v Washington (minimum contacts)

Answer 10

(1) Due process requires only that in order to subject a defendant to a judgment in personam, if he be not present within the territory of the jurisdiction, he have certain minimum contacts with it such that the maintenance of the suit does not offend `traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice.’
(2) boundary line b/w activities that justify PJ not quantitative but rather depend upon the quality and nature of the activity in relation to due process
(3) sometimes, single or occasional acts are sufficient IF those acts strongly relate to cause of action

Question 11

original jurisdiction

Answer 11

the power of a court to hear a case for the first time

e.g. diversity or federal question

Question 12

Hanson v Denckla (purposeful availment)

Answer 12

“minimum contacts analysis varies with quality and nature of Ds activities, but it is essential that there be some act by which D purp avails itself of the privilege of conducting activities within the forum state, thus invoking the benefits and protections of its laws”

Question 13

WWV v Woodson rule

Answer 13

(1) if sale of product not simply an isolated occurrence, but arises from the efforts to serve, directly or indirectly, the market for its products in other states –> not unreasonable to subject entity to suit in one of those states if its allegedly defective merchandise has there been the source of injury to its owner or to others
(2) forum state does not exceed its powers under due process clause if it asserts PJ over corp that delivers products into stream of commerce with expectation that they will be purchased by consumers in the forum state

Question 14

general jurisdiction

Answer 14

a state court may exercise general jurisdiction only when defendant is “essentially at home” in the forum state. GJ extends to any and all claims brought against defendant.

Question 15

relation b/w cause of action and activities within forum state for GJ

Answer 15

claims do not need to relate to the forum state or the activities within the state. defendant is subject to general jurisdiction in qualifying state despite events or conduct occurring anywhere else in the world.

Question 16

where is defendant subject to GJ?

Answer 16

in the defendant’s place of domicile, or in a forum state where the activities are “so continuous and systematic as to render it essentially at home in the forum state.”

Question 17

domicile test for individual and corporation

Answer 17

for person, domicile is a place where a person resides and shows intent to remain within that place. for corporation, domicile is considered where (a) place of incorporation, or (b) principal place of business.

Question 18

Goodyear v Brown

Answer 18

court can claim GJ over foreign corporation when contacts are so “continuous and systematic” as to render them essentially at home in forum state, although a single or occasional act can allow jurisdiction over claims related to that act

Question 19

Daimler v Bauman

Answer 19

it is not whether a foreign corporation’s in forum contacts can be said to be in some sense continuous and systematic, it is whether that corporation’s affiliations with the state are SO continuous and systematic as to render it essentially at home in the forum state

Question 20

long arm statutes

Answer 20

allows for a state court to obtain PJ over an out of state defendant on the basis of certain acts committed by an out of state defendant, provided that the defendant has a sufficient connection with the state

Question 21

Gibbons v Brown

Answer 21

obtaining in personam jurisdiction over a non resident defendant requires a two-pronged showing.

(1) plaintiff must allege sufficient jurisdictional facts to bring defendant within the coverage of the state long arm statute
(2) if first prong is satisfied, second inquiry is whether sufficient minimum contacts are shown to comply with the requirements of due process

Question 22

28 USC 1390 - Venue (Scope)

Answer 22

the term “venue” refers to the geographic specification of the proper court or courts for the litigation of a civil action that is within the subject-matter jurisdiction of the district courts in general

Question 23

28 USC 1391(b) - Venue Generally

Answer 23

civil action may be brought in -

(1) a judicial district in which any defendant resides, if all defendants are residents of the State in which the district is located;
(2) a judicial district in which a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claim occurred, or a substantial part of the property that is the subject of the action is situated; or
(3) if there is no district in which an action may otherwise be brought as provided in this section, any judicial district in which any defendant is subject to the court’s personal jurisdiction with respect to such action.

Question 24

Burnham case

Answer 24

plurality decision

• Scalia - presence good by itself b/c tradition of due process & Pennoyer - don’t have to do Int’l Shoe test
• Brennan - must meet Int’l Shoe test for every case (most traditional bases meet minimum contacts)

Question 25

Louisville & Nashville Railroad Well Pleaded Complaint Rule

Answer 25

federal cause of action established only when P’s short and plain statement shows based on federal laws or Constitution and thus “arises under the Constitution and laws of US”

Question 26

28 USC 1331 Federal Question Jurisdiction

Answer 26

“The district courts shall have original jurisdiction of all civil actions arising under the Constitution, laws, or treaties of the United States.”

Question 27

can the court remove based on lack of SMJ at any time?

Answer 27

yes

Question 28

28 USC 1332 - Diversity Jurisdiction

Answer 28

(a) The district courts shall have original jurisdiction of all civil actions where the matter in controversy EXCEEDS the sum or value of $75,000, exclusive of interest and costs, and is between citizens of complete diversity

Question 29

Strawbridge v Curtiss - complete diversity question

Answer 29

Complete diversity requirement - the existence of a single party with the same state citizenship as that of an opposing party will destroy diversity

Question 30

Hawkins v Masters Farms - domicile test

Answer 30

“For adults, domicile is established by physical presence in a place in connection with a certain state of mind concerning one’s intent to remain there.”

Question 31

28 USC 1332(c)(1) - diversity of corporation

Answer 31

“(1) a corporation shall be deemed to be a citizen of every State and foreign state by which it has been incorporated and of the State or foreign state where it has its principal place of business ….”

Question 32

Hertz Corp v Friend - nerve center test

Answer 32

“[28 U.S.C. § 1332(c)(1)’s] principal place of business’ is best read as referring to the place where a corporation’s officers direct, control, and coordinate the corporation’s activities. It is … the corporation’s nerve center.’ And in practice it should normally be the place where the corporation maintains its headquarters – provided that the headquarters is the actual center of direction, control, and coordination, i.e., the `nerve center,’ and not simply an office where the corporation holds its board meetings….”

Question 33

amount in controversy requirement

Answer 33

sum OR value that exceeds $75K

Question 34

Single P with two or more unrelated claims against same D. Can you aggregate

Answer 34

yes

Question 35

Multiple P’s against single D. Can you aggregate?

Answer 35

cannot aggregate claims unless have a common undivided interest and single title or right and value of total interest is over $75K

Question 36

P’s claim over $75K and D brings up counter claim. Can counterclaim be brought in federal court?

Answer 36

• if compulsory, then allowed to assert in federal court.

- if not, DJ not satisfied unless exceeds $75K requirement

Question 37

28 USC 1367(a) - Supplemental Jurisdiction

Answer 37

“(a) Except as provided in subsections (b) and (c) or as expressly provided otherwise by Federal statute, in any civil action of which the district courts have original jurisdiction, the district courts shall have supplemental jurisdiction over all other claims that are so related to claims in the action within such original jurisdiction that they form part of the same case or controversy under Article III of the United States Constitution. Such supplemental jurisdiction shall include claims that involve the joinder or intervention of additional parties.”

Question 38

UMW v Gibbs

Answer 38

“[Supplemental] jurisdiction, in the sense of judicial power, exists whenever there is a claim [within the constitutional jurisdiction], and the relationship between that claim and the [claim outside the constitutionally enumerated jurisdiction of the federal courts] permits the conclusion that the entire action before the court comprises but one constitutional `case.’ The federal claim must have substance sufficient to confer subject matter jurisdiction on the court. The state and federal claims must derive from a common nucleus of operative fact. But if, considered without regard to their federal or state character, a plaintiff’s claims are such that he would ordinarily be expected to try them all on one judicial proceeding, then, assuming substantiality of the federal issues, there is power in federal courts to hear the whole.”

• both claims MUST derive from common nucleus of operative facts

Question 39

In re Ameriquest Mortgage Co.

Answer 39

“A loose factual connection may be sufficient to confer supplemental jurisdiction, so long as those facts are both common and operative. To determine whether the federal and state law claims are connected by common and operative facts, courts routinely compare the facts necessary to prove the elements of the federal claim with those necessary to the success of the state claim.’ We also may ask whether the state claims can be resolved or dismissed without affecting the federal claims.’”

Question 40

28 USC 1367(b) - supplemental jurisdiction restrictions on DJ

Answer 40

“(b) In any civil action of which the district courts have original jurisdiction founded solely on section 1332 of this title, the district courts shall not have supplemental jurisdiction under subsection (a) over claims by plaintiffs against persons made parties under Rule 14, 19, 20, or 24 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, or over claims by persons proposed to be joined as plaintiffs under Rule 19 of such rules, or seeking to intervene as plaintiffs under Rule 24 of such rules, when exercising supplemental jurisdiction over such claims would be inconsistent with the jurisdictional requirements of section 1332.”

• if bring additional parties that disrupt complete diversity, then no supplemental jurisdiction allowed.

Question 41

28 USC 1391(c) For all venue purposes -

Answer 41

(1) a natural person, including an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence in the United States, shall be deemed to reside in the judicial district in which that person is domiciled;
(2) an entity with the capacity to sue and be sued in its common name under applicable law, whether or not incorporated, shall be deemed to reside, if a defendant, in any judicial district in which such defendant is subject to the court’s personal jurisdiction with respect to the civil action in question and, if a plaintiff, only in the judicial district in which it maintains its principal place of business; and
(3) a defendant not resident in the United States may be sued in any judicial district, and the joinder of such a defendant shall be disregarded in determining where the action may be brought with respect to other defendants.

Question 42

28 USC 1391(d) - corporations

Answer 42

For purposes of venue …, in a State which has more than one judicial district and in which a defendant that is a corporation is subject to personal jurisdiction at the time an action is commenced, such corporation shall be deemed to reside in any district in that State within which its contacts would be sufficient to subject it to personal jurisdiction if that district were a separate State, and, if there is no such district, the corporation shall be deemed to reside in the district within which it has the most significant contacts.

Question 43

28 USC 1406 - transfer

Answer 43

(a) The district court of a district in which is filed a case laying venue in the wrong division or district shall dismiss, or if it be in the interest of justice, transfer such case to any district or division in which it could have been brought.

Question 44

28 USC 1367(c) - declining Supp Jurisdiction

Answer 44

“(c) The district courts may decline to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over a claim under subsection (a) if –

(1) the claim raises a novel or complex issue of State law,
(2) the claim substantially predominates over the claim or claims over which the district court has original jurisdiction,
(3) the district court has dismissed all claims over which it has original jurisdiction, or
(4) in exceptional circumstances, there are other compelling reasons for declining jurisdiction.”

Question 45

28 USC 1367(d) - Supp Jurisdiction statute of limitations

Answer 45

“(d) The period of limitations for any claim asserted under subsection (a), and for any other claim in the same action that is voluntarily dismissed at the same time as or after the dismissal of the claim under subsection (a), shall be tolled while the claim is pending and for a period of 30 days after it is dismissed unless State law provides for a longer tolling period.”

Question 46

28 USC 1441(a) - Generally - Removal of Civil Actions

Answer 46

“Except as otherwise expressly provided by Act of Congress, any civil action brought in a State court of which the district courts of the United States have original jurisdiction, may be removed by the defendant or the defendants, to the district court of the United States for the district and division embracing the place where such action is pending.”

Question 47

28 USC 1441(b) - Removal based on DJ - Removal of Civil Actions

Answer 47

(1) In determining whether a civil action is removable on the basis of jurisdiction under section 1332(a) of this title, the citizenship of defendants sued under fictitious names shall be disregarded.
(2) A civil action otherwise removable solely on the basis of the jurisdiction under section 1332(a) of this title may not be removed if any of the parties in interest properly joined and served as defendants is a citizen of the State in which such action is brought.”

Question 48

28 USC 1441(c) - Joinder of federal law claims and state law claims - Removal of Civil Actions

Answer 48

(1) If a civil action includes –
(A) a claim arising under the Constitution, laws, or treaties of the United States (within the meaning of section 1331 of this title), and
(B) a claim not within the original or supplemental jurisdiction of the district court or a claim that has been made nonremovable by statute, the entire claim may be removed if the action would be removable without the inclusion of the claim described in subparagraph (B).”
(2) Upon removal of an action described in paragraph (1), the district court shall sever from the action all claims described in paragraph (1)(B) and shall remand the severed claims to the State court from which the action was removed. ….”

Question 49

28 USC 1446(a) - Generally - Procedure for Removal

Answer 49

A defendant or defendants desiring to remove any civil action from a State court shall file in the district court of the United States for the district and division within which such action is pending a notice of removal signed pursuant to Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and containing a short and plain statement of the grounds for removal, together with a copy of all process, pleadings, and orders served upon such defendant or defendants in such action.

Question 50

28 USC 1446(b) - Requirements; generally - Procedure for Removal

Answer 50

(1) The notice of removal of a civil action or proceeding shall be filed within 30 days after the receipt by the defendant, through service or otherwise, of a copy of the initial pleading setting forth the claim for relief upon which such action or proceeding is based, or within 30 days after the service of summons upon the defendant if such initial pleading has then been filed in court and is not required to be served on the defendant, whichever period is shorter.
(3) Except as provided in subsection (c), if the case stated by the initial pleading is not removable, a notice of removal may be filed within 30 days after receipt by the defendant, through service or otherwise, of a copy of an amended pleading, motion, order or other paper from which it may first be ascertained that the case is one which is or has become removable.

Question 51

28 USC 1446(c) - Requirements; removal based on DJ - Procedure for Removal

Answer 51

(1) A case may not be removed under subsection (b)(3) on the basis of jurisdiction conferred by section 1332 more than 1 year after commencement of the action, unless the district court finds that the plaintiff has acted in bad faith in order to prevent a defendant from removing the action.
(2) If removal of a civil action is sought on the basis of the jurisdiction conferred by section 1332(a), the sum demanded in good faith in the initial pleading shall be deemed to be the amount in controversy, except that –
(A) The notice of removal may assert the amount in controversy if the initial pleading seeks
(i) nonmonetary relief; or
(ii) a money judgement, but the State practice either does not permit demand for a specified sum or permits recovery of damages in excess of the amount demanded; and
(B) removal of the action is proper on the basis of an amount in controversy asserted under subparagraph (A) if the district court finds, by the preponderance of the evidence, that the amount in controversy exceeds the amount specified in section 1332(a).
(3)(B) If the notice of removal is filed more than 1 year after commencement of the action and the district court finds that the plaintiff deliberately failed to disclose the actual amount in controversy to prevent removal, that finding shall be deemed bad faith under paragraph (1).

Question 52

Erie Question

Answer 52

when does state law, rather than federal law, apply in federal court? - generally in DJ cases

Question 53

substantive law

Answer 53

law that defines the rights and obligations of the parties

e.g. a law that sets out the elements of a tort claim

Question 54

procedural law

Answer 54

governs the manner and means of enforcing substantive rights

e.g. rule that allows each party to serve 25 interrogatories on the other

Question 55

Swift v Tyson

Answer 55

interpreted 28 USC 1652 to mean state statutes, not state common law

Question 56

Erie v Tompkins

Answer 56

• fixed Swift v Tyson
• substantive law of state courts apply in federal court litigation
• substantive law means state common law AND state statutes

Question 57

28 USC 1652 - State Laws as Rules of Decision

Answer 57

“The laws of the several states, except where the Constitution or treaties of the United States or Acts of Congress otherwise require or provide, shall be regarded as rules of decision in civil actions in the courts of the United States, in cases where they apply.”

• state law cause of action —> federal courts must apply state substantive law
• federal law cause of action –> federal courts must apply federal law

Question 58

28 USC 2072 - Rules of Procedure and Evidence

Answer 58

“(a) The Supreme Court shall have the power to prescribe general rules of practice and procedure and rules of evidence for cases in the United States district courts (including proceedings before magistrate judges thereof) and courts of appeals.

• authorizes Supreme Court to create federal rules of procedure
  (b) Such rules shall not abridge, enlarge, or modify any substantive right. All laws in conflict with such rules shall be of no further force or effect after such rules have taken effect.”
• cannot alter substantive law

Question 59

Byrd test

Answer 59

(1) is the question a procedural or substantive law question?
- if substantive, then stop here and apply state substantive law
- if procedural, move to step 2
(2) is procedural rule outcome determinative?
- even if outcome determinative due to state rule, federal court is to accept or reject if federal interests outweigh state interests

Question 60

Hanna test

Answer 60

(1) is federal statute or FRCP constitutional?
- answer is almost always yes
(2) is FRCP within scope of Rules Enabling Act?
- must apply federal procedural law

Question 61

Caterpillar v Lewis

Answer 61

if federal jurisdiction is proper at the time of the judgment, then district court’s error in prematurely removing a case from state court to federal court does not warrant vacating the verdict