Personal Jurisdiction

Question 1

Traditional Bases (Step One)

Answer 1

Did the defendant satisfy any of the traditional bases of jurisdiction (presence, consent, in rem)?

Question 2

Long-arm Statute (Step Two)

Answer 2

Is a long-arm statute involved to acquire jurisdiction over a nonresident defendant?

If so, is the defendant’s conduct covered under the long-arm statute? Is the long-arm statute one that reaches to the furthest extent permitted under the Constitution?

Question 3

Due Process (Step Three)

Answer 3

State that any exercise of jurisdiction should be consistent with due process. State as well that this requires minimum contacts and compliance with traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice under International Shoe v. Washington.

Question 4

Minimum Contacts Analysis (Step Four)

Answer 4

Discuss whether the contacts are systematic and continuous so that defendant is essentially at home in the forum state. If so, the cause of action need not be related to the contacts with the forum (General jurisdiction).

If not, discuss whether the claim or cause of action arose out of the contacts (Specific jurisdiction). This requires purposeful availment of the privileges and benefits of the forum and it was foreseeable to the defendant that they would be haled into the forum court.

Question 5

Fairness Requirements (Step Five)

Answer 5

(1) The trial in the forum is not gravely difficult and inconvenient;
(2) the forum state has an interest in providing redress;
(3) plaintiff’s interest in convenient relief;
(4) interstate judicial system’s interest in obtaining the most efficient resolution; and
(5) shared interest of states in furthering fundamental substantive social policies