Civil Procedure Fall Outline

Creel_CivProI_Fall_2009

Civil Procedure Outline

Acquiring Jurisdiction Over the Parties To A Lawsuit

1. Traditional Bases of Jurisdiction

1. Personal Jurisdiction (in personam jurisdiction)

-This judgment may be enforced against any property the defendant owned or later came to own. (open box, can be used to get to other property)

-Can be taken to other states under the Full Faith and Credit Clause.

In personam jurisdiction can be established by statute that allows be established by DOMICILE,

Physical Presence in Forum and personally served within forum,

Voluntary Appearance in Court (consents to jurisdiction)

Consent to Service, or

Long-Arm jurisdiction either Tailored Specific Act or Due Process

2. In Rem and Quasi in Rem Jurisdiction

In rem proceedings are against the whole world

In rem judgment awards plaintiff the specific property that was attached as the basis for jurisdiction. (sealed box, cannot be used to reach other property).

Quasi in Rem- is binding only to the parties of the lawsuit. Valid only to the extent of the value of that particular parties property. Cannot be used to get to other property.

2. Long-Arm Jurisdiction

1. Minimum Contacts Test (International Shoe, activities were systematic and continuous, and they enjoyed benefits of doing business there)

“Due process Clause of 14^th Amendment- requires only that in order to subject a defendant to a judgment in personam, must fall under the Long-Arm statute and satisfy 3 prong test:

1. Has defendant purposefully availed himself of the privilege of conducting activities in the forum, thereby invoking benefits and protection of state’s laws?

2. Does the Lawsuit arise out of or relate to the defendants purposeful contacts with forum, or if not, are defendants forum contacts so extensive that no relationship is necessary?

3. Would the exercise of jurisdiction be unfair and unreasonable, taking into account interests of defendant, state, plaintiff, and other states?

Must have 1 and 2, then defendant can argue that 3 defeats jurisdiction.

2. Statutory Limits on the Assertion of Long-Arm Jurisdiction

Tailored or Specific-Act Statutes (only reach certain types of behavior like torts, or transaction of business and action arises out of that, ownership of property)

or

Due Process Statutes (go to the limits of the due process clause of 14^th Amend)

3. “Minimum Contacts”: The “Purposeful Availment” Requirement

To Establish “Purposeful Availment” 4 Categories:

1. Defendant or Employee’s entered the state and conducted activity there (International Shoe, or Hess v. Pawloski, driving in the forum, or Hanson v. Denkla, trust and inheritance issue)

2. Defendant entered into contractual relationship with forum resident (Burger King or suit against ins. agent refusing to pay resident of forum)

3. Defendant whose products enter the forum through the ordinary “stream of commerce”(Volkswagen, product liability suit for item purchased in forum or flowing into forum)

4. Defendant whose out-of-state conduct caused an injurious “effect in the forum state. (defamation felt mostly in forum and directed at forum)

4. “Minimum Contacts”: The Relatedness Requirment

Courts look to whether the claim arises from the defendant’s contacts w/the forum. If claim is related to these contacts, a court is more likely to find jurisdiction is fair and reasonable. (Specific Jurisdiction, example case Nowak v. Tak How where woman on vacation drowns in pool).

Courts will look at these factors to determine if is related to or not:

1. “but for” this is the least restrictive, but for…claim would not have occurred

2. “substantial connection” or “lie in the wake of commercial activities”

3. “proximate cause” the most restrictive and is about foreseeablility which helps defendant better anticipate which conduct is likely to hale them to the forum.

General Jurisdiction-If not arising from the contacts, but the defendants activities in the forum are systematic and continuous, a court could find sufficient basis for exercising jurisdiction based on any cause of action but pretty high threshold (general jurisdiction, example cases Perkins v. Benguet where CEO of Japanese Corp. working out of Ohio while shut down overseas and failed to pay stocks, not related but contacts systematic and continuous so allow suit)

5. The Reasonableness Requirement

Looked at after find minimum contacts and relatedness. Is now burden of defendant to make a compelling case that jurisdiction would be unreasonable and unfair so as to offend Due Process Clause of the 14^th Amendment.

Courts will also look at if the exercise of jurisdiction is reasonable and will look at Gestalt Factors such as:

Burden on the Defendant- (must be special, unique, significant)

Forum States Interest in Adjudicating Dispute

Plaintiff’s interest in Obtaining Convenient & Effective Relief

Interstate (international) Judicial Systems Interest in Resolution of Controversies

Interests of Other States in Furthering Their Substantive Social Policies

Example Cases (Asahi II, not reasonable, and Nowak II reasonable)

3. Minimum Contacts and the Traditional Bases of Jurisdiction

1. In Rem and Quasi In Rem Jurisdiction- usually for in rem, the presence of property in the state is enough for exercising in rem jurisdiction over said property. But after Shaffer and Burnham, some courts hold that will still need to look to minimum contacts before asserting jurisdiction for quasi in-rem jurisdiction for suits that relate to the attached property (personal injury) and in suits where seek to use the property of the other to satisfy some purpose. NOW MUST USE MINIMUM CONTACTS TEST TO DETERMINE IF JURISDICTION BY FORUM IS PROPER FOR ALL LONG ARM STATUTES IN REM AND IN PERSONAM. (Shaffer v. Heitner, defendant whose stock held in Delaware but not business there did not have minimum contacts for jurisdiction purposes in quasi in rem suit)

2. Physical Presence

Unless brought there under duress, the physical presence is usually sufficient for finding...

Buy the full version of these notes or essay plans and more in our Civil Procedure Outlines.