Personal Jurisdiction

1) Is this is a state Court or federal court proceeding?

a. If state go to step 2
b. If federal, look at 4(k)(1)
i. If only 4(k)(1)(a) applies go to step 2is subject to the
jurisdiction of a court of general jurisdiction (i.e. state court)
where the district court is located
ii. 4(k)(1)(b)party joined under Rule 14 or 19 (3rd party or
necessary party) who is served within 100 miles from where the
summons was issued (i.e. the court)
iii. 4(k)(1)(c)when authorized by a federal statute
2) Are these contacts substantial enough for general jurisdiction?
a. Corporations must be at home
i. State of incorporation
ii. Principal place of business (i.e. headquarters)
iii. **Service of an officer in forum state is GOOD SERVICE (in
terms of NOTICE) but DOES NOT GIVE PJ!!
b. Persons must be at home
i. Domicile
ii. Service in forum [if extensive substantial business in state we
did not know]
If YES, we have general jurisdictionSTOPNOT ON THE TESTON
THE TEST KEEP GOING
If NO, go to step 3
3) Is there specific jurisdiction?
a. Does the state statute give personal jurisdiction (i.e. Long Arm
Statute)?
-> Which provision of the statute?
-> Remember, states interpret statutes differentlyNY within state
(i.e. exploding blender was made in the state) something that
happened in the statewithout state something that happened
outside state (i.e. exploding blender was made somewhere else and was
sent here).
If YES, go to step 4.
If NO, go to step 7.
4) Is there minimum contact?
a. Did D purposefully avail himself of the forum.
i. Stream of Commerce Cases
1. McIntyre: 3 different approaches
a. Kennedy: D purposefully availed to forum by
purposefully directing activity to the forum
 b. Breyer: D purposefully availed + something more
(i.e. specially related design, advertising, etc.)
c. Ginsburg: IF national or multinational, expect to
get sued. Makes distinctions between types of
corporations.
ii. DefamationKeeton, Calder, Revell
1. Calder Test + Purposeful Availment
iii. KsBurger King, Hanson, McGee (What about consumers,
what about locality)
If NO purposeful availment go to step 7.
If purposeful availment go to step 5.
5) Do these contacts arise from or relate to the activities?
a. Shaffer---sufficiently related
b. Pilot school in TX everything else elsewhereproblem with relation
Hotel sends ad to MA person slips and falls in poolproblem with
relation
If in world-wide the cars were ocean ready to drive along shorecan
argue that they are reaching out implicitly
If NOT related, go to step 7.
If related, go to step 6.
6) Is it fair to bring the case in the forum? (Fairness factorsonly in SPECIFIC
JURISDICTION)
a. No one factor is dispositive.
1. Burden is on D to show how hard it is to bring in forum.
2. Forums interest in adjudicating case. (McGee, Asahi)
3. Plaintiffs interest in obtaining convenient + effective
relief.
If tips balance for PJ, then PJ.
If no PJ (which is very hard), see step 7.
7) In-Rem Jurisdiction
a. Must attach property at the beginning
b. Property must be related to claim. [see Shaffer pg 110highlighted
part]

If sure there is no jurisdiction or sure you will losedont go wait to collaterally

attack it
If not sure of jurisdiction or not sure if at faultlitigate it
International Shoe:
Salesmen paid by commissions in Washington, but has no stock of merchandise, no
stock, no deliveries of goods. They get paid commissions based on salethey rent
rooms to show samples but do not sell the shoes there.
Specific jurisdiction: Continuous and systematic activity but also give rise to the
liabilities sued on.
No Jurisdiction: If isolated instances and not related to claim.
Application: The activities carried on in behalf of the company were neither
irregular nor casual. They were systematic and continuous throughout the years in
question. They resulted in a large volume of interstate business, in the course of
which appellant received the benefits and protections of the laws of the state,
including the right to resort to the courts for the enforcement of rights. It is evident
that these operations ESTABLISH SUFFICIENT CONTACTS OR TIES WITH
THE STATE OF THE FORUM TO MAKE IT REASONABLE AND JUST, according
to our traditional notions conception of fair play and justice, to permit the state to
enforcement of its rights.

McGee
Texas Company mailed a reinsurance certificate to the California insured, the
insured in turn sent his premiums from California, insured died in California.
Sufficient for purposes of due process that suit was based on (1) K delivered in Cali,
(2) premiums mailed from there, (3) insured died there. Cali has an interest in
providing effective means of redress.
Hanson
P created a trust when she was domiciled in PA, trust was executed in DE, DE bank
was trustee. P moved to FL and designated the recipients of the trust.
The unilateral activity of those who claim a relationship with a nonresident
defendant cannot satisfy the requirement of contact with the forum state.
Defendant must purposefully avail itself of the privilege of conducting
activities with the forum state, thus invoking the benefits and protections
of its laws.
World-Wide
P purchases a car in NY to move to Arizona and has accident in OK. World-wide
distributes in NY, NJ and CT and there is no evidence showing that the companies
had activities in OK.
--Okay under OKs long arm
--Need minimum contactsas to not offend traditional notions of fair play and
substantial justice.
--Five fairness factors:
(1) burden on D
(2) forum states interest in adjudicating the dispute
(3) Ps interest in obtaining convenient and effective relief
(4) interstate judicial systems interest in obtaining the most efficient resolution of
controversies
(5) shared interest of the several States in furthering fundamental substantive
social policies

Here, (1) no activity in Ok--no sales or services nor avail themselves of none of the
privileges and benefits of OK (2) solicit no business there. Nor do they regularly sell
cars to OK customers or retailers. FORESEEABILITY IS NOT ENOUGH. Must
anticipate litigationthat way it can take steps to alleviate its risks. Here,
unilateral activity.
Brennan dissent: car would obv go there also witnesses and other stuff are in the
forum.

Keeton:
Brought suit against Hustler magazine in NH for defamationwas distributed in
NH and nationwide. Keeton was citizen of NY. Only brought it in NH because
statute of limitations was not barred there. Magazine was distributed there, she
suffered injury because of those copies there and in other states P does not need
to have minimum contacts with state, D does

Calder:
Court upheld jurisdiction in California against the editor and writer of an allegedly
defamatory article about a Cali citizen. Writer and editor were citizens of Florida
neither had traveled to Cali in connection with this article and was written and
edited in Florida. It was published in National Enquirerwhich is widely
distributed in Cali. Cali was the focal point of the story and the harm
reasonable for them to anticipate being haled into court there
(1) Story concerned Cali activities
(2) Of a Cali resident
(3) Of her career in Cali
 (4) Drawn from Cali sources
(5) Harm suffered in Cali

Burger King:
Purposeful availment requires that D will not be haled into court because of a
random fortuitous or attenuated: contact or the unilateral activity of another
party or a third person. Jurisdiction is proper when the D HIMSELF (A) D
deliberately engaged in significant activities (B) created continuing obligations
between himself and the forum, (C) manifestly availed himself of the privilege of
conducting business thereactivities are shielded by the benefits and protections of
the forumso not unreasonable.
Dont need physical presence, as long as commercial actors efforts are
purposefully directed toward the forum HERE: they reached out to
negotiate franchise, long-term relationship, used Burger Kings name and image
and reputation. Should have expected to be in court when he did not make
contractually required payments but kept using the companys brand. {K said
governed by FL lawnot dispositive but relevantwhen combined with others
jurisdiction} No fraud or duress.
Factors:
(1) burden on D
(2) forum states interest in adjudicating the dispute
(3) Ps interest in obtaining convenient and effective relief
(4) interstate judicial systems interest in obtaining the most efficient resolution of
controversies
(5) shared interest of the several States in furthering fundamental substantive
social policies

Mc Intyre:
A. Nicastro injured his hand while using a machine in NJ
but it was manufactured in Englandwhere McIntyre is
incorporated and operates. It had an independent US
distributor located in Ohiohad conventions in Vegas but
never in NJno more than 4 machines. SCOTUS holds
NO PJ.
(A) Kennedy (4 Justices): No jurisdiction because they
did not target NJno intent to service the market
in NJ. Targeted USA but not NJ. :. No purposeful
availment and thus no contact.
Must intend to send goods, not enough for the
D to know that they will reach the forum
stateneed to focus on contacts with NJ not US.
Had no office in NJ, did not pay taxes there,
did not advertise there, did not send
 employees therenot another contact other
than the machine ending up there.
Purposefully availed itself to US not NJ
(B) Bryer and Alito: There is no regular flow, no
regular course, and no something more i.e.
list of potential customers in NJ who might
have regularly attended the trade shows,
nothing to show McIntyre purposefully
availed itself to NJ, or that it delivered its
goods in the stream commerce with the
expectation that it will be bought by NJ users.
(C) Ginsburg (3 justices): If they target USA and know
that it will get into other statestarget all states,
you are subject to PJ wherever the product causes
injury. Says NJ is largest scrap metal market and
4th largest destination for importshow could not
have intended for it to reach NJ. Distinguish type
of manufacturers: cases where local P get injured
by activity of those involved in interstate or
international tradeand cases where the D is a
natural or legal person whose economic activities
are largely home based (i.e. without design to gain
much from sales in distant markets). HERE
MCINTYRE IS TRYING TO EXPLOIT THE
MARKET.
PJ can be waived at any time
Failure to object can lead to it being waived
If go to Court to challenge itbound by the Courts decision
Forum selection clauses are now generally enforced
IN REM JURISDICTION:
Harris v. Balkdebt=property for attachment [overruled]
Shaffer: Property in state indicates person benefited form the states
protection in the interestso if property itself is the source of controversy
then yes in-rem jurisdictionand even suits for injury suffered in land of an
absentee owneror otherwise related to the rights and duties arising out of
that ownership.
o BUT if there is no relationship between the property and the Ps cause
of actionthe presence of Ds property in the state does not give PJ.
o If get judgment and then full faith and credit clause can convert it to
judgment for the state and get
 o DE did not have statute saying we have PJ over directorship of DE
corps.
o The stock was attached at the beginningbut their wrongs had no
relations to the stock
No PJ if tricking D into the state

Revell v Lidov:
Article about Lidov posted on Columbias website about Revell. Sued in TX. No
general jurisdiction bcuz Columbia is NY and Lidov is in MARevell sued in Texas.
The Court came up with sliding scale of contact:

Passive website Some Interactive elements Repeated online contacts

with forum
Just Posts info some exchange between owners contacts
with owners
And users of the website and users
Need to examine nature Jurisdiction may be
proper

Here, not like Calderarticle contains no reference to TX; nor Revells activities in
TX; nor directed to TX readers, as distinguished from other state; TX was not focal
point of the article or the harm.
Ps residence in TX and harm suffered there not enough for PJ.
IN SUM: no meet Calderand the low level interaction of website=NO purposefully
availfairness factors not in favor.

Note case: When company used a Utahs company logo on website (infringement)
then yes PJ.

GENERAL
Daimler: 22 Argentina residents suing Daimler in California
Pennoyer still good:
1) Any assertion of PJ or in rem J is subject to the requirements of the Due
Process Clause of the 14th Amendment of US Constitution
2) Any judgment rendered in the absence of jurisdiction is null and
unenforceable in the state and is not entitled to full faith and credit in sister
states.
3) Due process is satisfied when D consents to be subject to (present when
served) or domiciled in the state.
4) An assertion of jurisdiction via attachment is constitutionally okay if you
attach at the start of the law suit.
5) Although Pennoyer concerned real property, in rem jurisdiction applies to all
property (real or personaltangible or intangible).

Three things different:

1) For in rem jurisdiction, the property must be related to the claim.
2) Serving D outside of the state can be good servicegives noticebut does not
give PJ.
3) If D is present in state and served then automatic PJ.
Notice (See Freer)

(1) Rule 4
(a) Summons served with copy of the complaint
(b) Served by a person at least 18 years old & not a party (or served by a
marshal)
(c) Can get waiver and just mail it
(d) Look at state where you are serving itif not then
a. Deliver copy of summons and complaint to individual personally;
b. Leaving a copy of each to the individuals dwelling or usual place of
abode with someone of suitable age and discretion who resides
there
c. Delivering a copy of each to an agent authorized by appointment or
by law to receive service of process
(e) If serving corporation: if in a judicial district of US
a. deliver a copy of summons and complaint to an officer or managing
director or any other agent
b. same as above

Triad Case: unrealistic that people have only one dwelling, house, or usual place of
abodeKhashoggi had 12.
Needs some indicia of permanence. Here we have:
(1) he owned and furnished it
(2) spent a lot of money to remodel it to fit his lifestyle
(3) had listed it bail application as residence
(4) was living there on day of service.
*They left it with the maid who is a person of suitable age and discretion and
resides there.
*Did not say what they would do if Khashoggi did not live there.

Placing them on table after person refuses to take them is good service.
Some courts have heldHotel YES; parental home of college student YES
In personam jurisdiction

Personal, or in personam, jurisdiction is imposed over a defendant when both statutory

and constitutional issues are met.

Statutory issues
The forum state must have granted power to the courts to exercise jurisdiction over
the defendant. This can be done in one of four ways:

1. the defendant is present in the forum when served.

2. the defendant is domiciled in the forum
3. the defendant consents to jurisdiction or
4. the state's long arm statute provides for jurisdiction.

Constitutional Issues
In order for the court to exercise personal jurisdiction, the Due Process clause of the
US Constitution requires that the defendant has maintained minimum contactwith the
forum state:

Minimum Contacts Test (International Shoe, Burger King)

Does the defendant have such minimum contacts with the forum state so that the
exercise of jurisdiction does not offend traditional notions of fair play and substantial
justice?

Minimum Contacts is demonstrated by:

1. Purposeful availment, such that the defendant's voluntary act to

reach out into the forum state was for some benefit to himself.
Examples include putting goods into the stream of commerce,
using the forum state's highways or taking advantage of the state's
corporate law.
2. Foreseeability. The Defendant knew or should have known that it
could get sued in the forum state.

Fair Play and Substantial Justice is a balance of the following factors:

1. The closeness of the relationship between the claim and the

contact.
2. Whether it is convenient to call the defendant into the forum state.
3. The state's interest in protecting its citizens.
Subject matter jurisdiction

A defendant can be drawn into Federal court only if the subject matter of the claim is
within its jurisdiction. There are two primary types of claims -- Federal
Question and Diversity of Citizenship.

Federal Question
The complaint must find its basis in some federal law, such as the US Constitution,
US Federal Law or Case Law. Citizenship is not relevant and parties can be from the
same state.

Diversity of Citizenship
Diversity of citizenship cases require that the plaintiff and defendant be citizens of
different states and that the amount in controversy be over $75,000.

Citizens of Different States

The parties must be of diverse citizen, such no single defendant can be a citizen of the
same state as any plaintiff.

Citizenship
People: Whether a person is a citizen of a particular state is determined
by domicile. Domicile is defined as presence in the state with the intent to remain
indefinitely.

Corporations: Whether a corporation is a citizen of a particular state is determined by

1) state of incorporation and 2) the state where the corporation has its principal place
of business.

Amount in Controversy
The claim for damages must be over $75,000 and must be made in good faith.

To reach the $75,000 limit, a plaintiff can

1. aggregate claims that arise from the same case or controversy

2. aggregate claims from different controversy if it's there's only one
defendant and one plaintiff