PERSONAL JURISDICTION

Question 1

PJ is about the court’s power over…

Answer 1

the parties

Question 2

Court’s power over the plaintiff

Answer 2

Because P filed the case, the court automatically has power over P.

Question 3

PJ involves one question:

Answer 3

can P sue D in this state?

Question 4

In Personal jurisdiction

Answer 4

P sues to impose a personal obligation on D.

Question 5

Whether there is PJ is a two-step analysis:

Answer 5

1. Satisfy a state long-arm statute AND
2. Satisfy the Constitution (Due Process).

Question 6

Statutory analysis of in personam jurisdiction

Answer 6

Each state is free to have its own long-arm statutes for in personam
jurisdiction. Because they vary, the content of such a statute is not testable on the MBE. Anyway, in most states, the statute says jurisdiction is OK if the case meets the
constitutional test.

Question 7

Constitutional analysis for in Personam Jurisdiction

Answer 7

Does D have “such minimum contacts with the forum” so jurisdiction does not offend traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice”?

Question 8

PJ is clearly
constitutional if D is:

Answer 8

(1) domiciled in the forum or
(2) consents or
(3) is voluntarily present in the forum when served with process.

Question 9

Specific jurisdiction

Answer 9

The type of personal jurisdiction a forum state may have over a defendant when (1) the defendant’s activities or contacts in that state gave rise to the cause of action at issue, (2) the defendant has minimum contacts with that state, and (3) the exercise of jurisdiction is supported by the due process standard of reasonableness

Question 10

If the Defendant is (1) NOT domiciled in the forum or (2) DOESNT consent or (3) ISNT voluntarily present in the forum when served with process - then we assess personal jurisdiction by assessing:

Answer 10

CONTACT – RELATEDNESS - FAIRNESS

Question 11

Contact

Answer 11

There must be a relevant contact between D and the forum state.

Question 12

Two Factors for Contact

Answer 12

1. The contact must result from purposeful availment
2. Foreseeability

Question 13

Purposeful Availment

Answer 13

• Ds voluntary act
• Defendant must reach out to the forum (cannot be an accident)

Question 14

Foreseeability

Answer 14

It must be foreseeable that defendant could get sued in this forum

Question 15

Relatedness between this contact and P’s claim. Ask this:

Answer 15

Does the Ps claim arise from the Ds contact with the forum?
- If yes, specific jurisdiction
- If no, court must have general jurisdiction

Question 16

Fairness gets asserted when?

Answer 16

In specific PJ cases only

Question 17

How to determine fairness

Answer 17

1. Burden on D and witnesses
   
   • the forum is constitutionally OK unless D can show that it puts him at a severe disadvantage in the litigation.
     
     • This is a very difficult burden
       to meet
     • The relative wealth of the parties is not determinative
2. State’s interest
   
   • The forum state may want to provide a courtroom for its citizens, who are allegedly being harmed by out-of-staters.
3. Plaintiff’s interest
   
   • Maybe injured and wants to sue at home.

Question 18

General jurisdiction

Answer 18

The type of personal jurisdiction a state may have over a defendant in which the defendant is subject to suit in that state on any cause of action, irrespective of whether there is a connection between the defendant’s activities or contacts in the state and the cause of action

D must be domiciled (“at home”) in the forum

Question 19

In Rem and Quasi in Rem Jurisdiction

Answer 19

In Rem:
- Allows courts to settle claims from all possible claimants (known and unknown, parties and nonparties) involving real and personal property within the borders of the forum state

Quasi in Rem:
- Allows courts to settle claims among the parties to the proceeding to property in the forum state