Class 1 TP Flashcards
Your client was wrongfully arrested. You bring a federal civil rights suit in the state court in Tennessee. The case is successfully appealed to the highest possible court of discretionary appellate review. Which court decides your case?
A. The Knox County Circuit Court
B. The U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Tennessee
C. The Tennessee Supreme Court
D. The U.S. Supreme Court
D. The U.S. Supreme Court
In personam, in rem, or quasi in-rem jurisdiction?
Mitchell v. Neff (the prior cases discussed in Pennoyer v. Neff)
In personam
In personam, in rem, or quasi in-rem jurisdiction?
Mitchell v. Neff except Mitchell attached Neff’s land before obtaining the judgment.
Quasi-in-rem Type 2
In personam, in rem, or quasi in-rem jurisdiction?
Dean Gill finds a briefcase full of cash and precious gems; he brings an action to determine their ownership.
In rem
In personam, in rem, or quasi in-rem jurisdiction?
Dean Gill tests the resolve of his mortgage company by ceasing payments. The company sues for foreclosure.
Quasi-in-rem Type 1
Martha, disowned by her family, has moved to Iowa and bought a farm. She is very happy in her new home. Unfortunately, she has a difficult former business partner, Samuel, who believes that Martha owes him money from a failed venture in Delaware. Samuel has sued Martha in Iowa. At the time, Martha was in the Hampton (NY) visiting family and friends, and so Samuel arranged for Martha to be served with process while she was there. Would the exercise of personal jurisdiction over Martha in Iowa courts be constitutional in this case?
Yes, because Martha resides in Iowa.
A truck owned by ABC, Inc. (a state A corporation based in State B), and driven by one of its employees traveled through State C on its way to State D to deliver some merchandise there. While in State C, the truck collided with a car driven by a rancher, who was injured in the accident. The rancher filed suit against ABC in State C, alleging negligence by the ABC truck driver. Assuming the ABC truck driver was acting within the scope of employment when the accident occurred, would the exercise of personal jurisdiction over ABC in State C courts be constitutional in this case?
Yes, because ABC’s contact with State C gave rise to the suit and the contact is of a nature and quality that justifies the exercise of personal jurisdiction.
