Civil Procedure

in personam

when a court’s jurisdiction is based on its authority of a defendant’s person

presence or domicile

in rem

jurisdiction based on court’s power over property within its territory

special appearance

party appears in court to contest jurisdiction without consenting to the jurisdiction

corporation’s domicile

incorporation and principal place of business

general jurisdiction

power of court to have jurisdiction over it on all matters

applicable when the person is at home/domiciled in the forum

purposeful availment

intentional act by a party towards a forum state in which the party takes advantage of the privileges of the states laws which justifies exercise of jurisdiction

done by a corporation on individual (normally person being sued)

specific jurisdiction

court has power over claims that arise out of defendant’s contacts with the forum and nothing else

petitioner

person seeking review

respondent

person defending review

collateral attack

challenge of a prior judgement in a new case instead of through a direct appeal

domicile

you only get one and it is where the forum has general jurisdiction over you

full faith and credit clause

other states must follow enforceable judgements made on the same issue in a different state

minimum contacts

standard for specific jurisdiction over International Shoe

minimum contacts must be related to what they are being sued for

demurrer

motion for dismissal

long-arm statute

statute that seeks to claim jurisdiction as a matter of state law

typically over out of state residents

plurality holding

narrowest grounds on which everyone agrees

general jurisdiction rule

defendant must be at home

goodyear facts

car crash happened in france and the family was trying to sue foreign subsidiaries in NC

goodyear holding

minmum contacts isn’t enough for general jurisdiction, need to show the defendant is at home

burnham facts

dude from NJ, wife lived in California, he went to California for work and she served him with process for a divorce suit

burnham holding

service on burnham didn’t violate due process

burnham reasoning

minimum contacts don’t apply when you are physically present

scalia- physical presence as basis for jurisdiction=historical and therefore ok

transient jurisdiction

if you are physically present in a state when served, there is general jurisdiction even if you aren’t a domiciliary

specific jurisdiction rule

established by minimum contacts with the forum state, contacts must be related to claim at hand and not offend traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice

pennoyer facts

dude sued over unpaid legal fees, won by default, attached property after the fact and seized it. property owner found out and started a new lawsuit contesting the jurisdiction in the original one

pennoyer ways to get in personam

domicilliary, consent, physical presence

hess facts

out of state driver case where long-arm statute deemed DMV as agent for service of process, dude got into car crash and other guy used this to sue him for injury

Hess type of jurisdiction

specific

hess holding

jurisdiction didn’t violate due process because notice was given in accordance to the statute

International shoe facts

business didn’t want to pay washington unemployment tax but they had salespeople in the state, washington sued them, business contested jurisdiction

international shoe rule

minimum contacts are sufficient to constitutionally exercise jurisdiction as long as they do not offend traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice

World wide VW type of jurisdiction

specific jurisdiction

WWVW facts

car bought in NY got in a crash in OK and then people tried to sue the NY dealer and distributor

WWVW rule

applies minimum contact from shoe, but adds in purposeful availment

WWVW Holding

no jurisdiction over dealer and distributor, cars are a moveable good but doesn’t make the suit foreseeable just because they are moveable

Hustler type of jurisdiction

specific jurisdiction

hustler facts

NY resident sued Ohio corp in NH for libel from a magazine they published in NY

Hustler holding

regular monthly sales of thousands of magazines are not random, isolated, or fortuitous, so they are minimum contacts

calder jurisdiction

specific jurisdiction

calder facts

california resident sued the national enquirer for libel, also sued specific employees

calder holding

jurisdiction over the specific employees was ok because they were primary participants in an alleged wrongdoing intentionally directed at a California resident

burger king facts

guys in michigan entered into a franchise agreement with burger king and then stopped paying them. burger king sued them in Florida because that’s where they were based and there was a choice of law provision in the contract

burger king holding

because the defendant deliberately engaged in significant activities within the state they purposefully availed themselves to the privilege of conducting business there, so it is not unreasonable to require them to submit to burdens of litigation in that forum

what is different about contract cases

you typically know who you are doing business with

longer term makes it more foreseeable you could be sued in the forum

factors of fair play and substantial justice

burden of defendant

forum state’s interest in adjudicating the dispute

plaintiff interest in obtaining convenient and effective relief

interstate judicial system interest in obtaining the most efficient resolution

shared interest in furthering substantive social policies

shaffer jurisdiction

specific jurisdiction

shaffer facts

shareholder tried to sue company executives for mismanaging the company by attaching their shares of the company as Delaware property to establish jurisdiction in delaware

Shaffer rule

minimum contacts standard from shoe

shaffer holding

the long-arm statute didn’t allow for the property to be used in this way to establish jurisdiction

mullane facts

case about fees from a common trust in NY, turned into notice case

mullane rule

notice myst be reasonably calculated under the circumstances

mullane jurisdiction

in rem

mullane holding

notice in this case wasn’t reasonable

when is mullane most applicable

property cases

main takeaway from mullane

you don’t need actual notice it just needs to be reasonable

Dusenberry facts

dude in prison whose property got seized, FBI sent a letter for notice

Dusenberry holding

the notice in this case was reasonably calculated because they sent it through certified mail to the prison, actual notice is not required