Personal Jurisdiction Flashcards
(41 cards)
Personal Jurisdiction
The ability of a court having subject matter jurisdiction to exercise power over a particular defendant or item of property
Limitations on Personal Jurisdiction, categories
- Statutory Limitations
- Constitutional Limitations
- Personal Jurisdiction in Federal Courts
Statutory limitations
a state statute must grant the court the power over the parties before the court, otherwise the court lacks PJ
Constitutional Limitations
- Defendant must have such contacts with the forum state that exercise of PJ is fair and reasonable
- Defendant must be given appropriate notice of the action and an opportunity to be heard
* Note: exercise of PJ over D in violation of these requirements is not valid, even if statute purports to grant court PJ
Personal jurisdiction in federal courts
- Generally, federal court analyzes PJ as if it were a court of the state in which it is located
- PJ without long-arm statutes over 3rd-party D and parties required to be joined under compulsory joinder rules
Three types of Personal Jurisdiction, categories
- In personam
- In rem
- Quasi in rem
In personam jurisdiction
Exists when the forum has power over the person of a particular D
- Court may render money judgment against D or other remedies
- Judgement creates D personal obligation subject to full faith and credit in all other states
- P may enforce judgment against D’s property in any other state
In rem jurisdiction
Exists when the court has power to adjudicate the rights of all persons in the world with respect to a particular item of property
- Limited to situations where property is located within physical borders of state AND where it’s necessary for state to be able to bind all persons re: property’s ownership and use
- Includes condemnation (eminent domain cases); forfeiture of property to the state; and settlement of decedent’s estates
Quasi in rem jurisdiction
- Court has power to determine whether particular individuals own specific property within the court’s control
- Note: unlike in rem, does not permit court to determine the rights of ALL PERSONS in the world with respect to property
- Court may adjudicate disputes other than ownership based on the presence of D’s property in the forum
- Note: D not personally bound by judgment and cannot be enforced against any D property
Statutory bases for “in personam” jurisdiction
- Whether D is present in forum state and is personally served w/ process;
- Whether D is domiciled in the forum state;
- Where D consents to jurisdiction; AND
- Where D has committed acts bringing D within the forum’s long-arm statutes
“In personam” jurisdiction basis: 1) physical presence at time of personal services
If D is physically present in the forum state and can be served with process within the borders of the state, even if merely passing through, state laws generally grant “in personam” jdx
*Note: exceptions for 1) service by fraud or force and 2) immunity of parties and witnesses
Exceptions to physical presence basis for statutory “in personam” jurisdiction
- Service by fraud or force invalid -> if P brings D into a state by fraud or force to serve process, generally invalid to exercise PJ over D
- Immunity of parties and witnesses -> grant immunity from PJ if nonresident is present in state solely to take part in judicial proceeding, or passing through state on way to judicial proceeding elsewhere
“In personam” jurisdiction basis 2: domicile
Most states grant court in personam jdx over persons domiciled in the state, even if D is not physically within the state when served with process
Domicile (in personam jurisdiction)
The place where person maintains permanent home
*Note: PRESENCE must be coupled w/ INTENTION place be permanent home
“In personam” jurisdiction basis 3: consent
D may expressly or impliedly consent to in personam jdx
Express consent (in personam jurisdiction)
Party’s express consent either before or after suit is commenced is sufficient basis for in personam jdx
- by contract -> advance consent to jdx in event a suit is brought
- by appointment of agent to accept service of process -> includes requirements for heavily regulated types of businesses in which nonresidents engage in that business to appoint such an agent
Implied consent (in personam jurisdiction)
When state has substantial reason to regulate the in-state activity (like driving in the state) of a nonresident of the state, by engaging in such activity (like an accident while driving), nonresident impliedly consents to jdx
Voluntary appearance in case (in personam jurisdiction)
D consents to jdx by a voluntary appearance (such as contesting case without challenging PJ), but there are “special appearance” exceptions that must be asserted by D in initial pleading to court
Basis for “in personam” jurisdiction 4: long-arm statute
In personam jdx over nonresidents who perform or cause to be performed certain acts within the state OR who cause results within the state by acts performed outside the state
*jdx regardless of whether D served in or out of forum, but limited to causes of action arising from the acts performed or results caused within the state
Constitutional Limitations on “in personam” jurisdiction
- sufficient contacts with the forum
2. adequate notice and opporunity to be heard
Sufficient contacts with the forum (“in personam” jdx)
- Traditional rule: physical power
2. Modern Due Process standard: Contact, relatedness, and fairness
Modern Due Process standard, 1) sufficient contacts with the forum (“in personam” jdx)
- Whether sufficient minimum contacts between D and the forum so that suit against D does not offend “traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice”
- Factors:
- -> Contact: purposeful availment and foreseeability
- -> Relatedness: whether claim arises out of or relates to D’s contacts with the forum
- -> Fairness: convenience, forum state’s interest, P’s interest in convenient and effective relief,
Contacts with the forum state (“in personam” jdx), purposeful availment
D’s contact with forum cannot be accidental
- Purposeful availment -> privilege of conducting activities with the forum and invocation of the benefits and protections of forum’s law (purposeful availment of the privileges and protections of the forum)
- Note: “stream of commerce” cases
- Note: Internet cases
“stream of commerce” cases, purposeful availment (sufficient contacts, along with foreseeability, for Cons check on “in personam” jdx)
A. Merely placing an item in the stream of commerce, by itself, is not a sufficient basis for PJ
B. Unresolved whether placing an item in stream w/ knowledge or hope that it will end up in a particular state would be sufficient basis for PJ -> look for INTENTIONAL targeting of the forum
C. Placing item in stream of commerce, coupled with some other acts that show intent to serve a particular state, IS A SUFFICIENT BASIS for PJ (i.e., modifying product to comply with state law, maintaining sales office within state, maintaining repair capabilities in the state, etc.)
