Personal Jurisdiction

Question 1

Pennoyer v. Neff

Answer 1

In order for a state to have personal jurisdiction over a non-resident defendant, that defendant must have a physical presence in the state.

Question 2

International Shoe Co. v. Washington

Answer 2

‘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”

Question 3

McGee v. International Life Insurance

Answer 3

• 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).

Question 4

Hanson v. Denckla

Answer 4

Unilateral activity (e.g. a single contract) with the forum state does not establish specific jurisdiction.

Question 5

World-Wide Volkswagen v. Woodson

Answer 5

• 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.

Question 6

J. McIntyre Machinery v. Nicastro

Answer 6

• 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.

Question 7

Ford Motor v. Montana Eighth Judicial District Court

Answer 7

• 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.

Question 8

Abdouch v. Lopez

Answer 8

• 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.

Question 9

Burger King v. Rudzewicz

Answer 9

• 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.

Question 10

Goodyear Dunlop Tires v. Brown

Answer 10

• 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.

Question 11

Daimler v. Bauman

Answer 11

• 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.

Question 12

Bristol-Myers Squibb v. Superior Court

Answer 12

• 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.

Question 13

Burnham v. Superior Court

Answer 13

If a defendant is served papers in the forum state, that individual is automatically under the general jurisdiction of that state.

Question 14

Personal Jurisdiction

Answer 14

Ability of a state to exercise power over a defendant
May be established by specific jurisdiction, general jurisdiction, waiver or consent.

Question 15

Specific Jurisdiction

Answer 15

• The defendant’s activities “arise out of or are connected with the activities within the state” (International Shoe)

Question 16

Purposeful Availment

Answer 16

“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)

Question 17

General Jurisdiction

Answer 17

• “[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

Question 18

Domicile

Answer 18

• 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)

Question 19

‘Sliding Scale’ Test

Answer 19

“Considers a Website’s interactivity and the nature of the commercial activities conducted over the Internet”

Question 20

‘Minimum Contacts’ Test

Answer 20

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)

Question 21

Personal Jurisdiction Fairness Factors

Answer 21

• Burden on the defendant
• Policy interests of the forum state
• Judicial efficiency

Question 22

Gibbons v. Brown

Answer 22

• 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.

Question 23

Rule 4(k)(1): Long Arm Statute

Answer 23

Must satisfy the forum state’s long arm statute

Question 24

Long-Arm Statutes

Answer 24

• 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.

Question 25

Carnival Cruise Lines v. Shute

Answer 25

*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.

Question 26

Atlantic Marine Construction

Answer 26

• 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.

Question 27

Forum Selection Clause

Answer 27

Clause in a contract which establishes a particular forum in which any legal disputes will be dealt with.

Question 28

Choice of Law Clause

Answer 28

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.