Personal Jurisdiction Flashcards
Traditional Bases
Physical Presence
Citizenship
Consent/Waiver
Physical Presence (TB)
Established in personam (body) or in rem (property)
- in personam: when defendant is actually physically present
- in rem: basing jurisdiction on a piece of real property defendant owns within the forum
Citizenship (TB)
A court has PJ over a defendant if the defendant is a citizen or is domiciled within the forum
Corporations are considered to be citizens of both the state in which they are incorporated and the state of their principle place of business
Consent/Waiver (TB)
A party may consent to being in a forum by agreeing to be tried or by failing to file a timely motion to dismiss for lack of PJ
Use it or Lose it Rule
A ∆ must bring all available 12(b) motions together, or waive them as untimely
if a ∆ moves to dismiss for lack of PJ, they cannot later move to dismiss for insufficient process
SMJ cannot be waived
Special Appearance Rule
An appearance made before the court specifically to object being tried there
At common law, the failure to make a special appearance constitutes consent to PJ, or waiver of potential no PJ arguments.
Federal Law has removed this rule
Plaintiff’s Forum Choice
A plaintiff waives their right to dispute the PJ of a forum they chose; they consented to a forum by virtue of the fact they chose to sue there.
Physical Presence Triggers
Where ∆ was when valid notice was given
Consent/Waiver Triggers
Special Appearance Rule
Timely filing all 12(b) motions (2-5) to dismiss; 12(b)(1) SMJ can be filed separately at any time
FSC
Forum Selection Clause
A party may consent to a specific forum through accepting a FSC in a contract
Modern Basis: long-Arm Jurisdiction
LAS
Shoe Formula: MC = FP+SJ
PA
ORFs
LAS
Cop-Out/Co-Extensive: Purports to reach as long as due process will allow. Skip directly to MC test.
Specific Acts Statute: Purports to reach a defendant who performed a specific act(s) within the forum state.
LAS must reach before moving onto MC test.
Other Relevant Factors (ORFs)
- Forum State’s Interest in Hearing the Case
- Plaintiff’s Interest in Using the Forum
- Defendant’s Interest in Avoiding the Forum
- Shared Interest of Several States in Substantive Policy (SSISS)
- Interstate Judicial System’s Interest in Efficiency and Economy (ISJS)
Forum State’s Interest in Hearing the Case Triggers
A forum state has an interest in hearing a case when the fates of state citizens are implicated, and when a substantial part of the events took place within the forum
π’s argument that FS has a strong interest:
Forum state citizens, forum state property, the act was committed in the forum state, or harm occurred in the forum state
If a citizen of the forum state died, harmed; forum state likes to protect their citizens
∆’s argument that FS has a weak interest:
Few or no parties are citizens of the form state - witnesses (DON’T discuss ∆’s citizenship b/c it’s always different than the FS)
The case involves a K containing a choice of law provision designated in the controlling law to be the law of some other state.
The case involves a contract containing a FSC designated in the proper court to be in some court other than the forum state.
Plaintiff’s Interest in Using the Forum Triggers
∆’s argument that π has a weak interest:
Lack of relevant evidence, lack of witnesses for π, where impact was felt (impact felt somewhere else)
π’s argument that he/she has a strong interest:
easy access to witnesses, evidence, where impact was felt (impact felt at forum state)
