Personal Jurisdiction Flashcards
Pennoyer v. Neff
In order for a state to have personal jurisdiction over a non-resident defendant, that defendant must have a physical presence in the state.
International Shoe Co. v. Washington
‘Minimum Contacts’ Test: a court has personal jurisdiction over an out-of-state defendant if that defendant has “certain minimum contact with the [forum state] such that the maintenance of the suit does not offend the traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice”
McGee v. International Life Insurance
- A single, relevant contract with the forum state can establish specific jurisdiction if it is accompanied by substantial contacts.
- These contacts do not have to be physical and can include exchanging money (e.g. paying premiums).
Hanson v. Denckla
Unilateral activity (e.g. a single contract) with the forum state does not establish specific jurisdiction.
World-Wide Volkswagen v. Woodson
- The ‘foreseeability’ of a product ending up in the forum state does not establish specific jurisdiction.
- The ‘foreseeability’ of the defendant facing a lawsuit in the forum state, through its “conduct and connection” with the forum state, does establish specific jurisdiction.
- An isolated contact does not establish specific jurisdiction.
J. McIntyre Machinery v. Nicastro
- A single product that passively ends up in the forum state through the ‘stream of commerce’ does not establish specific jurisdiction
- The foreign and/or out-of-state company must directly target the forum state’s market for the sale of their product.
Ford Motor v. Montana Eighth Judicial District Court
- Contacts only need to relate to the injury, not be the cause of it.
- The foreign and/or out-of-state company must directly target the forum state’s market for the sale of their product.
- The ‘foreseeability’ of the defendant facing a lawsuit in the forum state, through its “conduct and connection” with the forum state, does establish specific jurisdiction.
Abdouch v. Lopez
- Minimum contacts can be established by internet interactions, but these must be targeted at the forum state.
- The foreign and/or out-of-state company must directly target the forum state’s market for the sale of their product.
Burger King v. Rudzewicz
- A single contract does not establish minimum contacts, there must also be a substantial relationship between the defendant and the forum state.
- Contacts do not have to be physical.
Goodyear Dunlop Tires v. Brown
- A product that passively ends up in the forum state through the ‘stream of commerce’ does not establish general jurisdiction.
- A corporation incorporated or headquartered in the forum state is under general jurisdiction.
Daimler v. Bauman
- The mere fact of a corporation doing business with the forum state does not establish general jurisdiction.
- Even if its subsidiary is ‘at home’ in the forum state, the corporation is not automatically considered at home and therefore not under general jurisdiction.
Bristol-Myers Squibb v. Superior Court
- Even if its subsidiary is ‘at home’ in the forum state, the corporation is not automatically considered at home and therefore not under general jurisdiction.
- The foreign and/or out-of-state company must directly target the forum state’s market for the sale of their product.
Burnham v. Superior Court
If a defendant is served papers in the forum state, that individual is automatically under the general jurisdiction of that state.
Personal Jurisdiction
Ability of a state to exercise power over a defendant
May be established by specific jurisdiction, general jurisdiction, waiver or consent.
Specific Jurisdiction
- The defendant’s activities “arise out of or are connected with the activities within the state” (International Shoe)
Purposeful Availment
“To the extent that a corporation exercises the privilege of conducting activities within a state, it enjoys the benefits and protection of the laws of that state. The exercise of that privilege may give rise to obligations” (International Shoe)
General Jurisdiction
- “[Defendant’s] affiliations with the State are so ‘continuous and systematic’ as to render them essentially at at home in the forum state” (Goodyear)
- Established by domicile or being served papers
Domicile
- Where an individual lives and intends to remain indefinitely
- “Domicile in the state alone is sufficient to bring an absent defendant [i.e. the defendant was not served in the domiciled state] within the reach of the state’s jurisdiction” (Milliken)
‘Sliding Scale’ Test
“Considers a Website’s interactivity and the nature of the commercial activities conducted over the Internet”
‘Minimum Contacts’ Test
A court has personal jurisdiction over an out-of-state defendant if that defendant has “certain minimum contact with the [forum state] such that the maintenance of the suit does not offend the traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice” (International Shoe)
Personal Jurisdiction Fairness Factors
- Burden on the defendant
- Policy interests of the forum state
- Judicial efficiency
Gibbons v. Brown
- Previous lawsuits do not establish jurisdiction over defendants in future lawsuits.
- A plaintiff must show that a defendant falls under the state long-arm statute and satisfy minimum contacts in order to establish jurisdiction.
Rule 4(k)(1): Long Arm Statute
Must satisfy the forum state’s long arm statute
Long-Arm Statutes
- State and federal courts have narrower personal jurisdiction than is allowed constitutionally.
- For a court to have personal jurisdiction, they must satisfy International Shoe and the state/federal long arm statute.
Carnival Cruise Lines v. Shute
*If a forum selection clause was not obtained in bad faith or through fraud - and the forum state is reasonable - then the fact it was non-negotiable and assumed to be standard procedure does not invalidate the clause.
Atlantic Marine Construction
- Under §1404 and the forum non conveniens doctrine, the court must transfer cases to the appropriate venue.
- Unless there are extraordinary circumstances, valid forum selection clauses should be honored.
Forum Selection Clause
Clause in a contract which establishes a particular forum in which any legal disputes will be dealt with.
Choice of Law Clause
Clause in a contract which establishes a particular state’s laws which will govern any legal disputes. Choice of law clause is irrelevant to venue.
