U of I
Popular in Course
verified elite notetaker
Popular in Department
This 3 page One Day of Notes was uploaded by Leann Beckman on Thursday October 9, 2014. The One Day of Notes belongs to a course at a university taught by a professor in Fall. Since its upload, it has received 69 views.
Reviews for PersonalJurisdiction.docx
Report this Material
What is Karma?
Karma is the currency of StudySoup.
You can buy or earn more Karma at anytime and redeem it for class notes, study guides, flashcards, and more!
Date Created: 10/09/14
Personal Jurisdiction A court s power and authority to issue a judgment that is binding on the parties involving a certain amount of parties Different from subject matter because that means a court has power to render decision on particular matter but personal jurisdiction Applicability to plaintiff court always has personal jurisdiction over the plaintiff because the plaintiff consents to the court s authority by filing the lawsuit Applicability to defendant court s personal jurisdiction over defendant depends on the relationship of the defendant to the state in which the court is located 0 Erie V Tompkinscourt had personal jurisdiction over Tompkins bc he filed the lawsuit in NY court has personal jurisdiction over Erie too bc the company is headquartered there 0 Volkwagon had no minimum contactties with Oklahoma court bc based in NY a car produced by them was simply driving through Oklahoma therefore court had no personal jurisdiction over them Subject matter jurisdiction power of court to hear a particular type of case Personal jurisdiction court s power and authority to issue a judgment that is binding on the parties 0 KEY is that in order for court to have the power and authority to render a binding decision court must have BOTH subject matter jurisdiction over particular type of case AND personal jurisdiction over the parties 0 Personal jurisdiction doesn t mean court has subject matter jurisdiction bc it would be ridiculous to prosecute a citizen in a civil court 4 possible situations in which court will have personal jurisdiction over a defendant 0 Defendant is a resident in state where court resides state court has PJ over all persons who reside in the state AND who are properly served 0 Nonresidents 0 Transient jurisdiction defendant is served while physically present in the state 0 Consent defendant consents to jurisdiction of court consent equals PJ 0 Minimum contacts Volkswagon International Shoe applies where a nonresident is not served while physically present and does not consent Whenever there are minimum contacts ties to state are so strong there is no need to be physically present or consent I General rule of minimum contacts court only has PJ over defendant who has had certain minimum contacts with the state so that permitting the suit does not offend traditional notions of fair play and substantial justics I International Shoe illustrates this rule I Court considers nature and extent of defendant s relationship with the state Key question Has the defendant purposefully availed itself to privileges of conducting activities in the state Limitation the minimum contact must be related to the particular lawsuit at issue Exception if non resident defendant has substantial continuous and systematic contacts with the state if this is so the court has general jurisdiction 0 Longarm Statutes 0 State statute that gives us the list of minimum contacts applicable in the state 0 Common list items I Transacting any business in the state I contracting to supply goods or services in the state I contracting to insure any person property or risk located in state I committing at tort in the state I owning using or possessing real property interest in the state Personal J urisdiction Federal Courts Federal district courts have PJ over defendant who would be subject to suit in the state in which federal district court sits If there are multiple parties in lawsuit court may also obtain PJ over defendant who resides Within 100 miles of the court even if over state boundaries American Type Culture Collection Vs Coleman pg 37 Corporation organized under DC laws principal place of business was Maryland corporation had no physical presence in Texas performed all business outside Texas Texas SC found corporation did not have sufficient minimum contacts with Texas and it Was not subject to personal jurisdiction Coleman sued corporation in Texas court of appeals affirmed and exercised personal jurisdiction US SC decided to hear case because there was a question of law that Was material to the decision of the case can the court exercise personal jurisdiction US SC reversed decision of court of appeals dismissed the case for lack of personal jurisdiction Normally US SC doesn t retry cases or reexamine the facts of a case but SC did in this case because there was a question of law material to the decision of the case No specific personal jurisdiction because no minimum contacts sales alone do not justify SPJ No general personal jurisdiction because no continuous and systematic contacts Federal law is superior than state laW state statutes must conform with federal law court may not exercise personal jurisdiction unless the defendant has quotminimum contactsquot with the state in which the court sits Generally the requirement of minimum contacts means that the defendant has to have taken actions that were purposefully directed towards the forum state Such actions may include among others selling goods in the state being incorporated in the state Visiting the state or bringing property in the state Minimum contacts are required by the defendant39s Fourteenth Amendment federal constitutional right to due process It is the quality and nature of the defendant s contacts rather than their number that is important to the minimum contact analysis Specific Vs General Personal Jurisdiction Specific PF Court has to affirm minimum contacts General PJ the court knows that the defendant is sufficiently tied to state bc the defendant has conducted continuous and systematic contacts with the state already has minimum contacts For a court to exercise specific personal jurisdiction there are 2 requirements 1 defendant s contacts with the forum must be purposeful and 2 the cause of action must arise from or relate to those contacts General jurisdiction is present when a defendant s contacts with a forum are continuous and systematic a more demanding minimum contacts analysis than specific jurisdiction
Are you sure you want to buy this material for
You're already Subscribed!
Looks like you've already subscribed to StudySoup, you won't need to purchase another subscription to get this material. To access this material simply click 'View Full Document'