Personal Jurisdiction

Question 1

State Authority for Full Faith and Credit

Answer 1

US Constitution Article IV, Section 1

Question 2

US Constitution Article IV, Section 1 (Due Process Clause)

Answer 2

“Nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.”

Question 3

Federal Authority for Full Faith and Credit

Answer 3

28 U.S.C. § 1738

Question 4

Corporations Domicile

Answer 4

1. Place of Incorporation
2. Primary Place of Business
3. Where contacts are “so ‘continuous and systematic’ as to render them essentially at home.”

Question 5

Policy Reasons for Minimum Contacts

Answer 5

1. States have an interest in providing residents with a remedy.
2. States should have an ability to exercise jurisdiction over defendants who are benefiting from their contacts with a state.
3. Modern Transportation and technology have made it easier to do business across state lines.

Question 6

Purposeful Availment - Contractual

Answer 6

1. Prior Negotiations
2. Contemplated Future Consequences
3. Terms of Contract
4. Parties Actual Course of Dealings

Question 7

Effect’s Test

Answer 7

1. Intentional Tort
2. Harm directed at forum state
3. Actions directed at forum state

Question 8

Pure SOC Theory (Brennnan)

Answer 8

Personal jurisdiction is satisfied when a defendant places at least substantial quantities of a product into the stream of commerce and they know the product is going to be marketed in the forum state.

Question 9

SOC Plus Theory (O’Connor)

Answer 9

Personal Jurisdiction’s minimum contacts occurs when a defendant places a product into the stream of commerce and directs their actions at the forum state.

Question 10

Stevens SOC Theory

Answer 10

Volume, Value, Hazardous Nature

Question 11

Arising Out of/Related To Spectrum

Answer 11

1. But for cause in fact
2. Substantial Connection
3. 1st Circuits Target Business Inquiry
4. Lie in Wake
5. Proximate Cause Legal Cause
6. Substantive Relevance

Question 12

But For Cause in Fact

Answer 12

Any action by the defendant that in hindsight can be logically identify in the causative chain

Question 13

Substantial Connection

Answer 13

Defendant’s actions are related to their substantial connection they have purposefully availed

Question 14

1st Circuit’s Target Business Inquiry

Answer 14

Defendant’s actions must be a foreseeable part of the causative chain

Question 15

Lie in Wake

Answer 15

Actions arising out of the wake of the commercial activities of the Defendant

Question 16

Proximate Cause Legal Cause

Answer 16

Defendant’s purposeful contacts with the forum must constitute both the “cause in fact” and the “legal cause” of the harm

Question 17

Substantive Relevance

Answer 17

Defendant’s forum contacts constitute a necessary element of the plaintiff’s claim for relief

Question 18

Gestalt Factors

Answer 18

1. Burden on Defendant
2. Forum State’s interest in Adjudicating the dispute
3. Plaintiff’s interest in obtaining convenient and effective relief
4. Resolution of controversies
5. Interest of other states in furthering their substantive policies

Question 19

Gestalt Factor - Burden on Defendant

Answer 19

1. Almost always inconvenient for defendant
2. Must present a special, unusual, or other constitutionally significant burden`

Question 20

Gestalt Factor - Forum State’s Interest in Adjudicating the dispute

Answer 20

1. Provide a remedy for forum state residents
2. Regulation of behaviors and activities within the state

Question 21

Gestalt Factor - Plaintiff’s interest in Obtaining Convenient and Effective Relief

Answer 21

1. Plaintiff’s interest will justify even the most serious burdens
2. Court needs to accord the difference to the plaintiff
3. Interstate judicial system’s interest in the most efficient resolution

Question 22

Gestalt Factor - Resolution of Controversies

Answer 22

1. Efficiency of Resolution
2. Avoidance of Piecemeal litigation

Question 23

Gestalt Factor - Interest of Other states in furthering their substantive policies

Answer 23

1. Consider the other state’s procedural and substantive policies