Personal Jurisdiction Outline Midterm

Thursday, September 23, 2010 12:36 PM

Personal jurisdiction requires the state satisfy the following elements: state statute requirements, constitutional requirements of due process, (two part) , and sufficient notice and opportunity to respond. 1. State Long Arm Statutes (Laundry list or full breadth of constitution) State legislatures free to grant courts power to exercise jurisdiction within limits of due process clause or confer to only part of constitutionally permissible jurisdiction. Laundry list statutes give courts leeway to reject jurisdiction cases having little connection with state without making constitutional pronouncements. 2. Constitutional Jurisdiction Traditional Pennoyer Jurisdiction (consent, resident, agent, physical presence, Property through in rem, quasi in rem Type I & II) Quasi Type II: property unrelated to lawsuit attached for personal jurisdiction. In Rem: property ownership as to entire world Quasi Type I: Property as to party vs yourself. (Min Contacts applies to all In Rem and maybe Transient Jurisdiction) If no physical presence, agent, or consent; Does person have minimum contacts? (Shoe) Requirements: minimum contacts: quality and nature A. Purposeful Availment (Hanson): "purposefully availed" itself of the benefits and protections of the law of the forum state. Example: Keeton: defendant purposefully availed itself engage in state activities by magazine distribution. WWV defendant did not purpoesfully avail itself. A. Unilateral : needs availment. Activity cannot be unilateral (Hanson) B. purposeful; not random or isolated. C. Must seek benefit/advantages of state D. Foreseeability (WWV) (anticipate being hailed into court?) Calder Effect: If defendant aims conduct towards forum state could have jurisdiction A. Relatedness- Systematic or continuous/ or Specific Jurisdiction (casual/sporadic but significant)

Car accident in forum state; plaintiff sues for car accident= specific If contacts are unrelated (general) then must be continuous and systematic (Shoe) Casual/Sporadic presence not enough for general jurisdiction. If contacts are related (specific) then casual/sporadic only one contact may be needed (McGee) Elements of specific Financial revenue Nature and quality of acts Duration Privileges/advantages of state C. Reasonable: Is as to not offend traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice. If minimum Contacts are found; defendant must make compelling case to avoid jurisdiction. (BK) Burden of Defendant is weighed against 1. 1. 2. 1. 1. 2. 3. 3. 4. Forum states interest in dispute Providing redress for citizens States enforcing law or policy Plaintiffs interest in convenient/effective relief Cost effective (documents, witnesses, bar) Regional bias Law applied (statute of limitations) Judicial systems interest in efficiency Shared social interest of states

y y y y

Case Breakdowns Pennoyer: Traditional Jurisdiction: transient, consent, quasi in rem, and resident. Hess: Implied Consent; Motorists who use roads of state should realize that this purposeful activity in forum state subjects other drivers to risks that people may be injured and sue. Therefore it would be unfair to allow out of state drivers to take advantage of highways, but not call them to account there for accidents they are involved in on those highways. Shoe PJ 11-13 salesmen resided in WA Salaries reimbursed by shoe Direct and control over salesmen established Against HQ in St. Louis Incorporated elsewhere No offices in WA No delivery of goods intrastate

Finding PJ: systematic and continuous and contacts also give rise to liabilities sued on. Received protection of laws/benefits of FS.

If in state contacts are very substantial. The defendant is subject to "general in personam jurisdiction" Defendant may be sued in state for any claim even one completely unrelated to in state activities. McGee: Life insurance purchased, Suit based on contract which had substantial connection with state. Premiums were mailed from there and the insured was resident of forum state. California has manifests interest in protecting citizens and contract provided a single significant contact for jurisdiction. Hanson: Family inheritance dispute. Creates trust in Penn and executes in Delaware/ then moves to Florida and will probated there. Florida have pj over bank trustee in Delaware? Unilateral activity (Donner doing business with Delaware) does not satisfy requirement of contact with forum state. Defendant must purposefully avail itself of privileges of conducting activities within the forum state, invoking benefits/protections of law. Gray: safety valve faulty and water heater explodes. Titan manufactured valve and sold to Ohio corporation who sold it to consumer. State is not unjust to hold it answerable there for any damage caused for defects in those products. (State Court) WWV PJ Mobile automobile related contact State's interest in protecting and enforcing laws defendant suffers no inconvenience. Stream of Commerce awareness Against New York Dealership Did not solicit business in FS or advertise. No close sales, no services

Finding: Foreseeability is not enough. Scope of activities of the seller, not the predictable area of use of the product by the buyer. Product reached state by unilateral act of a third party. Conduct must be such that he should reasonably anticipate being haled into court there. Dissent WWV Brennan: Right to due process is not violated if there is no inconvenience to the defendant weighed against state interest to protect citizens.

Keeton: Non resident Keeton sues Hustler for defamation in New Hampshire. The distribution of magazines in N.H. provided specific jurisdiction, when cause of action arises out of very activity being conducted. Substantial Interest in cooperating with other states to provide forum for efficiently litigating all issues and damages arising out of libel. No need for plaintiff to have minimum contacts with state

Calder: Where reporter from forum state made defamatory statements about plaintiff that were then published in forum state. Even though both writers have never been to Florida court found jurisdiction because defendants aimed their conduct towards plaintiff and forum state with direct effects. Calder Effects Test 1. Defendant must aim conduct towards forum state (target, direct, aim, focus actions) 2. Effects must be felt in forum state (not just in the defendant)

Burger King (Brennan) PJ 20 year franchise agreement CEO visited Florida Contacts were all purposeful Against Most direct contact through Michigan offices.

Finding: Defendant needs to show unconstitutional burden (severe). Does not have to act within state. Continuous but limited activity in state such as ongoing business relationship will support specific jurisdiction. Create substantial connection or deliberately engage in significant activities. Jurisdiction cannot be avoided just because no physical entry Contract is only one factor in determining personal jurisdiction. PJ found because defendant reached out to Florida and negotiated a franchise contract therefore availing himself to the benefits/privileges of the state. Asahi (Stream of Commerce) PJ Stream of Commerce Against No business in California Didn't direct/import Slim margin income from CA No State interest NR v NR

Finding Plurality: Against PJ Brennan (4) Stream of Commerce: regular anticipated flow of products from manufacture to distribute retail. As long as participant is aware that final product is being marketed in FS, then no surprise of lawsuit. O'Connor (3) Mere awareness is not enough. Manufacturer must purposefully avail itself to forum's market. Traditional Notions of Fair Play substantial Justice Burden is severe Distance between Japan and California great (foreign legal system Plaintiff not CA resident and CA no legitimate interests in protecting.

Helicol (General Jurisdiction) PJ Purchased and trained fleet in Texas One trip by CEO to Houston to sign contract Crash-pilot- related to claim Purposefully availed Against "package of goods" Focus on death claim not breach Of contract, hence no specific. No offices/sales/employees in FS

Finding: Mere Purchases at regular intervals not enough to establish for general jurisdiction. No continuous systematic contacts. Purchases training/ not sufficient because unrelated to cause of action. Dissent Brennan: specific jurisdiction should be applicable whenever the cause of action arises out of or related to the contacts between the defendants and the forum. Shaffer PJ Greyhound made choice of incorporation in FS Voluntary association invoked benefits/privileges Against Focus on individuals of suit Not required to acquire interest in corporation Individuals never set foot Did not purposefully avail

Finding: Must find minimum Contacts for In-Rem; not enough found Delaware stock attached. Property not subject matter nor is underlying cause of action. Positions as directors and officers not sufficient contacts. Dissent Brennan: (state's interest) Substantial interest in providing redress for citizens State interest in overseeing affairs of entity created in state. Burnham Rule: Tag "Transient" Jurisdiction allowed even without minimum contacts, doesn't overrule Schaffer. Scalia View (4): All courts have historically held traditional transient jurisdiction to be enough. Pedigree is validity. Distinguishes in state and out of state resident. In personam v in rem jurisdiction. Brennan View: in accordance with shaffer, minimum contacts are also needed. 3 days enough to assert personal jurisdiction. "benefits of state" Note: Intangible property can be attached (Harris v Balk) Revell PJ Against

Zippo only applies to specific jurisdict

Never been to FS Unaware Revell lives in FS No reference/direction towards FS

Finding: Defendant must aim conduct towards fs (Calder Test) Zippo Scale (specific test) Passive >>> interactive internet site. Reasonable notice and opportunity to be heard Mullane: Local newspaper was only notice. What is proper differs from circumstances. Known beneficiaries were not sent letters. Was unreasonable not to send letters to known defendants. Rule: Notice reasonably calculated, under all the circumstances to apprise interested parties of the pendency of the action and afford them an opportunity to present their objections. Triad:DHUPA must have sufficient indicia of permanence and courts prefer person to be residing there while being served.

Challenge Jurisdiction Special Appearance Common law approach: cannot raise merits or any other issues otherwise is subject to court jurisdiction Federal Rules allow person to raise other objections Rule 12(b) Either approach objection to jurisdiction must be raised immediately Defendant who loses in court may proceed to defend merits and can later challenge that lower court did not have personal jurisdiction to appellate. Collateral Attack Right now to appear but risks a default judgment Plaintiff must domesticate the judgment. 1. Seek judgment on the judgment" 2. Use judgment creditor Full Faith and Credit Clause forces states to honor other state courts Enforcing court may inquire whether other court had personal jurisdiction (collateral Attack)

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful

Master Your Semester with Scribd & The New York Times

Special offer for students: Only $4.99/month.

Master Your Semester with a Special Offer from Scribd & The New York Times

Cancel anytime.