You are on page 1of 2

PERSONAL JURISDICTION__________________________________________________________________________________

1. Traditional jurisdiction under Pennoyer? iii. Ps unilateral contact with forum state
a. Consent? created harm under Denckla or
i. Objection waived? Volkswagen? =INSUFFICIENT
ii. Appeared in court to defend on the b. Burger King reasonableness factors (if
merits? unreasonable, violates due process)?
iii. Forum selection clause (Carnival)? i. Burden on D?
b. Served while present? 1. Foreign D under Asahi?
i. Tag jurisdiction under Burnham (NOT ii. Interest of P?
majority concurrence says min. iii. States interest?
contacts test)? 1. Case between two foreign
c. Resident? parties under Asahi?
i. Individual = domicile, Corp. = INC / iv. Other states trumping interest?
PPB 3. Is this a specific or general jurisdiction claim?
ii. General jurisdiction? a. Did the claim arise out of the Ds contacts with
1. Essentially at home under the forum state?
Goodyear? Under Daimler: i. If yes, specific jurisdiction apply min.
domicile? (INC/Principal place contacts test.
of business) ii. If no, general jurisdiction.
d. Seizure of property in forum state? (Quasi in 1. D must be essentially at home
rem) in the forum state through
i. Shaffer min contacts still required continuous and systematic
2. International Shoe minimum contacts test? relations under Goodyear.
a. Intentionality and purposeful availment? 2. Corporation at home = INC /
i. Purposefully targeting forum state PPB under Daimler, but
under Burger King or McGee or person indicates these categories may
in forum state under Calder? = not be exclusive.
SUFFICIENT 4. If no, object/move to dismiss under 12(b)(2) for lack of
ii. Placing product into stream of PJ in first responsive pleading or WAIVED
commerce under American Radiator, a. Under Insurance Co. of Ireland, a court may
Goodyear, Asahi or J. McIntyre? = sanction PJ to an uncooperative party
MAYBE sufficient

SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION__________________________________________________________________________

1. 1331 Federal Question? 3. 1367 Supplemental?
a. Case arises under laws of U.S. under Art III Sec a. Part of same constitutional case or
2? controversy under 1367(a) and Gibbs
b. Federal question on the face of well-pleaded CNOOF?
complaint under Mottley and 1331? b. Under 1367(b) original diversity SMJ and no
i. FQ embedded in a state law claim is claim by P against party added under FRCP
(1) substantial, (2) disputed, and (3) 14, 19, 20 or 24 violates 1332?
no floodgates Merrell Dow/Grable? i. Claim doesnt meet amount in
2. 1332 Diversity? controversy under Star-Kist?
a. Complete diversity of citizenship under 1332 c. Should be dismissed under 1367(c) courts
and Strawbridge? discretion for (1) complex state law issue, (2)
i. Individuals = domicile (Mas) predomination over original claim, or (3) other
ii. Corporations = INC and PPB/nerve exceptional circumstances?
center (Hertz) i. NOTE: dismissal is appealable
iii. Association citizenship under domicile 4. D trying to remove under 1441?
of any member a. All Ds agree?
b. Amount in controversy as determined by b. If diversity, not filed in home state of any D?
complaint >75k under 1332? c. Timely request?
i. P->D: all even unrelated amounts can d. Removable on basis of well-pleaded complaint
be aggregated (Rule 18) under Mottley.
ii. P1/P2->D: one Ps claim must meet 75k e. NOTE: remand after removal is NOT appealable
iii. Cant aggregate claims against multiple 5. If no, object/move to dismiss under 12(b)(1) lack of
Ds /amount of counterclaim is irrelevant SMJ at any time
c. Not brought in Ds home state?
1. Under 1391, venue is proper if brought in a district b. Improper, so dismissed and re-filed, without
a. (1) Where any D resides (individual = domicile, substantive law, in proper venue under 1406?
corp.=PJ)? c. Proper/improper and more convenient venue
i. All Ds MUST reside in same state outside the U.S. so dismissed under forum non
1. Joined and TPD excluded convenience?
b. (2) Where substantial part of events giving rise i. Gulf Oil factors (Piper Aircraft): (1)
to claim occurred? access to evidence, (2) location/cost of
c. (3) ONLY IF (1) and (2) dont apply, where PJ witnesses, (3) scene of incident, (4)
over D? local interest, (5) courts familiarity
d. Automatically proper under 1441 Removal? w/law, (6) burden on jurors, etc.
2. Original venue is 3. If no, object/move to dismiss under 12(b)(3) improper
a. Proper, so transferred w/ substantive law, to venue in first responsive pleading or WAIVED
more convenient venue under 1404 (Ferens)? 4. NOTE: disfavored motions can be made post-12(b)(3)