Personal Jurisdiction (superseded)

Question 1

Diversity jurisdiction

Answer 1

Diversity jurisdiction exists when there is complete diversity of citizenship between plaintiffs and defendants, and where the amount in controversy exceeds $75k.

Question 2

Citizenship

Answer 2

Citizenship for a person depends upon their domicile (residence with a subjective intent to make that state their permanent home). For an artificial person such as an LLC or corporation, citizenship is determined by the corporate principal place of business, or nerve center where the company is controlled, or any state in which it is incorporated. Executors are citizens of the decedent’s state, and partnerships are citizens of the domicile of every [general] partner.

Question 3

Amount in controversy

Answer 3

1. $75k + good faith;
2. P can aggregate multiple claims against a single D, or all Ds if they are tortfeasors;
3. Multiple Ps may aggregate to enforce an undivided right;
4. Injunctive relief, AIC based on value of benefit/ cost of compliance.
5. D’s counterclaim is irrelevant in determining AIC.

Question 4

Removal jurisdiction

Answer 4

Where the plaintiff has brought suit in state court, the removal statute [28 U.S.C.A.
§1441(a)] permits the defendant to force the case to be removed to federal district court only if the case could have been originally brought in a federal court (i.e., the federal court must have federal subject matter jurisdiction over the case).

Removal jurisdiction (RJ) is when the defendant may remove from state court to federal court if: 1) the federal court has SMJ, 2) all defendants agree, 3) no defendant is a resident of the forum state in diversity cases, AND 4) removal is sought within 30 days of either service of the summons or receiving the initial pleading, whichever is shorter. A plaintiff may never remove, and a case cannot be removed more than one year after commencement in a diversity action. If a plaintiff files in a state court, a defendant must remove it to the federal district court that “embraces” that state court.

Question 5

Supplemental jurisdiction

Answer 5

1. Related/common nucleus of operative fact;
2. Cannot circumvent lack of diversity over 3P
3. SLJ does not require AIC/diversity if not used solely to defeat and common nucleus requirements.
4. Judicial economy reasons.

Supplemental jurisdiction (SLJ) is if a federal court has SMJ over a claim, then it may exercise SLJ over additional state claims when they arise from a common nucleus of operative fact. SLJ cannot be used to circumvent lack of diversity and cannot provide jurisdiction over third parties. SLJ does not require AIC or diversity, and if not used solely to defeat diversity and the common nucleus requirements, then SLJ will likely be granted for judicial economy reasons.

Question 6

Remand to state court

Answer 6

A federal court must remand a case to state court if there is no federal SMJ. A federal court MAY remand a case that originally had SMJ after the federal claims have been decided. A motion to remand must be filed within 30 days of a request for removal jurisdiction.

Question 7

Natural person’s domicile

Answer 7

A natural person’s domicile is the state where he:

1. Physically “resides
2. with the intent to remain there for the indefinite future.

Question 8

Personal jurisdiction

Answer 8

Personal jurisdiction is the power or authority of a court to render a judgment that binds the person of the defendant

Question 9

International Shoe

Answer 9

Due process requires only that in order to subject a defendant to a judgment in personam, if he be not present within the territory of the forum, he have certain minimum contacts with it such that the maintenance of the suit does not offend ‘traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice.

Question 10

Minimum contacts

Answer 10

1. Purposeful availment

2. Fair play and substantial justice

Question 11

Aggregation of claims (for diversity purposes)

Answer 11

1. Single P may aggregate multiple claims over single D
2. Multiple Ps may aggregate to enforce an undivided right.
3. Single P MAY NOT aggregate claims against multiple Ds.

Question 12

Which four factors has the Supreme Court identified as important in analyzing traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice in the law of personal jurisdiction?

Answer 12

The Supreme Court has identified the following factors as important in analyzing traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice in the law of personal jurisdiction:
the forum state’s interest in regulating the activity involved or in providing a forum,
the relative convenience to the parties in terms of the locations of witnesses and evidence,
whether an alternative forum exists, and
the avoidance of multiple lawsuits if a single suit would be sufficient

Question 13

Type I vs. Type II quasi in rem

Answer 13

There are two types of quasi in rem jurisdiction:

1. type I, in which the plaintiff’s claim is related to the defendant’s property within the forum state; and
2. type II, in which there is no relationship between the in-state property and the claim. Type II cases frequently fail to survive the due process inquiry.