Personal Jurisdiction Flashcards
Pennoyer v. Neff
finding that jurisdiction is limited to the physical presence of the defendant in the state or property within the state because plaintiff (Neff) was not property given notice of the lawsuit brought by Mitchell that attached his property
Hess v. Pawloski
finding that the state may have jurisdiction over a nonresident defendant (Hess) because the defendant used his motor vehicle on a public highway in Massachusetts, caused an auto accident on Massachusetts highways, and was property served
International Shoe v. Washington
finding that the state had jurisdiction over the nonresident defendant (International Shoe) because defendant had minimum contacts with the state.
Goodyear v. Brown
finding that the state did not have jurisdiction over a foreign entity/subsidiary in a suit related to negligence in design, construction, testing, and inspection of the product (tire) because the corporation did not engage in continuous and systemic activities with the forum state
World-Wide Volkswagen v. Woodsen
finding that the state did not have jurisdiction over the regional distributor and retail dealer of an automobile in a products-liability suit because a fortuitously driven automobile does not constitute requisite “minimum contacts” and the distributor and retailer did not purposefully avail themselves to the forum state
Keeton v. Hustler Magazine
finding that a state has jursidiction over a nonresident defendant corporation in a libel claim because a substantial number of copies of the magazine was distributed in the state and the selling was intentional (intentional tort and the harm arose in the forum state)
Calder v. Jones
finding that a state has jurisdiction over a nonresident defendant writer and editor of an article in a libel claim because the harm was caused in the forum state (rejecting the argument that the first amendment imposes a significant limitation upon the exercise of jurisdiction over defendants whose rights of expression might thereby be compromised)
Burger King v. Rudzewicz
finding that a state has jurisdiction over a nonresident defendant because the dispute grew out of a contracts dispute and the defendant had a substantial and continuing relationship with the plaintiff corporation’s headquarters and received fair notice from the contract documents and the course of dealing that he might be subject to suit in Florida
Pennington v. Fourth National Bank
finding that the attachment of an in-state bank account of a nonresident does not violate due process because the in-state bank account (quasi in rem)
Harris v. Balk
finding that the obligation of a debtor to pay his debts clings to and accompanies him wherever he goes and that a state has jurisdiction over the debtor’s debts when he is in that state
Shaffer v. Heitner
finding that a state cannot seize property of nonresident defendants to claim jurisdiction when the property is not related to the cause of action or underlying cause of the litigation (goodbye to quasi in rem)
Burnham v. Superior Court
finding that a state has jurisdiction over a nonresident defendant when he is served while physically (transiently) in the state
J. McIntyre Machinery Ltd v. Nicastro
finding that a state does not have jurisdiction over a nonresident (foreign) corporation in a products-liability claim because the defendant was found to not have targeted the forum (it is not enough that the defendant might have predicted that its goods will reach the forum state)
Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. Superior Court
finding that a state does not have jurisdiction over claims of nonresident plaintiffs against a nonresident defendant because a connection between the forum and the specific claims at issue is necessary
Ford Motor Co. v. Eighth Judicial District
finding that a state has jurisdiction over a nonresident corporation because the corporation does substantial business in the state (has targeted the forum) and the corporation’s business relates to–but doesn’t necessarily give rise to–the claim
