Personal Jurisdiction Flashcards
The constitutional analysis for determining whether there is personal jurisdiction requires that the defendant have minimum contacts with the forum state such that “jurisdiction does not offend traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice.” What does that require the court to assess?
The court must assess the following factors: 1) contacts; 2) relatedness; and 3) fairness.
In determining whether the defendant has sufficient contacts with the forum state, what two things must be proven?
1) the contact must result from a purposeful availment by the defendant; and 2) it must be foreseeable that the defendant could get sued in that forum.
What are some examples of a purposeful availment by the defendant?
Marketing a product in the forum; using the roads in the forum; establishing a domicile in the forum; traveling in the the forum; sending an email into the forum state.
What must be found in order to meet the relatedness prong of the constitutional test for personal jurisdiction?
The plaintiff’s claim must arise from the defendant’s contact with the forum state.
If a plaintiff’s claim arises from a defendant’s contact with a state, what kind of personal jurisdiction does the court have over the defendant?
Specific personal jurisdiction.
If the plaintiff’s claim does not arise from the defendant’s contact with the forum state, can the court still exercise personal jurisdiction over the defendant?
Yes, if the court has general jurisdiction. In that case, the court will have personal jurisdiction over the defendant for claims that arose anywhere in the world.
For a court to have general jurisdiction, what must be true?
The defendant is at home in the forum state.
Where are corporations domiciled; i.e. subject to general personal jurisdiction?
1) wherever it is incorporated; and 2) where it’s principle place of business is located.
To meet the fairness prong of the constitutional test for personal jurisdiction, what must be considered?
The following must be considered: 1) the burden on the defendant and witnesses; 2) the state’s interest; and 3) the plaintiff’s interest.
The fairness prong of the constitutional test for personal jurisdiction applies only to . . .
specific jurisdiction
General Jurisdiction —
a state has jurisdiction over those who are at home in that state, despite their actions taking place elsewhere.
Specific Jurisdiction —
a state has jurisdiction over those who are in the state and whose actions take place in that state.
In a diversity case where federal law does not directly conflict with state law, what law must the judge apply?
State law if the issue to be determined is “substantive.”
What kinds of law are patently substantive for purposes of the Erie Doctrine?
Elements of a claim or defense; statutes of limitations; rules for tolling statutes of limitations; and conflict of law rules.
In a diversity case where federal law does not directly conflict with state law, and the issue to be determined is not obviously substantive, what must the federal judge do?
Determine whether the issue is substantive or not. In making this determination, the court must consider the following: 1) is applying the particular law outcome determinative? 2) does either federal or state system have strong interest in having its rule applied? 3) if the federal court ignores state law on this issue, will it cause parties to flock to federal court? If so, the court should probably apply state law.
