Personal Jurisdiction

4(k)(1)(B) - EXCEPTION

"100 Mile Bulge Rule" - allows federal courts to exercise PJ over person who can be served process within 100 miles of the court. § Only applies to Ds joined as 3rd party Ds under FRCP 14 and those joined as required Ds under FRCP 19.

Relatedness

"Arise out of or relate to" a. But for cause of the injury Asahi (arguably) b. Keeton injury arose out of the defamation b/c of the magazines sold in the forum c. Walden not something that occurred in Nevada, occurred in Georgia d. Narrower than relatedness

Carnival Cruise v. Shute

(Woman fell and god injured, brought suit in her home state; Carnival had printed on passengers tickets that any dispute arising out of the cruise must be litigated in FL- its headquarters) Holding: This was a valid forum clause provision because the cruise-line had a legitimate intrest and this was purely routine and nearly identical to every commercial passage contract issued by D. o Positives of this clause: limit forum so there is no confusion where suit may be brought and reduced fares for ships because this limits the forum it might be sued in

28 USC 1367 Supplemental Jurisdiction

(a) Except as provided in subsections (b) and (c) or as expressly provided otherwise by Federal statute, in any civil action of which the district courts have original jurisdiction, the district courts shall have supplemental jurisdiction over all other claims that are so related to claims in the action within such original jurisdiction that they form part of the same case or controversy under Article III of the United States Constitution. Such supplemental jurisdiction shall include claims that involve the joinder or intervention of additional parties. (b) In any civil action of which the district courts have original jurisdiction founded solely on section 1332 of this title, the district courts shall not have supplemental jurisdiction under subsection (a) over claims by plaintiffs against persons made parties under Rule 14, 19, 20, or 24 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, or over claims by persons proposed to be joined as plaintiffs under Rule 19 of such rules, or seeking to intervene as plaintiffs under Rule 24 of such rules, when exercising supplemental jurisdiction over such claims would be inconsistent with the jurisdictional requirements of section 1332. (c) The district courts may decline to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over a claim under subsection (a) if— (1) the claim raises a novel or complex issue of State law, (2) the claim substantially predominates over the claim or claims over which the district court has original jurisdiction, (3) the district court has dismissed all claims over which it has original jurisdiction, or (4) in exceptional circumstances, there are other compelling reasons for declining jurisdiction. (d) The period of limitations for any claim asserted under subsection (a), and for any other claim in the same action that is voluntarily dismissed at the same time as or after the dismissal of the claim under subsection (a), shall be tolled while the claim is pending and for a period of 30 days after it is dismissed unless State law provides for a longer tolling period. (e) As used in this section, the term "State" includes the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, and any territory or possession of the United States.

Quasi in rem limitations

- If you sue the property, the most you can recover is the value of the property - Can attach a letter to a mailbox or any obvious location where an attentive owner would recognize it

Minimum Contacts Test

1- D has established minimum contacts with the state 2- Claim against him arises from that contact, AND 3- Jurisdiction will not offend traditional notions of fairness

Specific (in personam)

1. Citizen of the state 2. Presence in the forum state 3. D consents to forum jurisdiction OR 4. Minimum Contacts

There are three ways to obtain personal jurisdiction

1. exhibit consent, 2. presence within a state at time the suit commences through service of process, 3. citizenship or domicile gives personal jurisdiction

Purposeful availment

1. knowingly conducting business in the state, 2. Burger King - reaching out to engage in contractual relationships at the outset 3. Soliciting business/advertising in the state 4. Stream of commerce (directing its product through stream of commerce in the forum) (Audi)

Specific Personal Jurisdiction (personam)

A claim that arises in the forum state (or with contacts from the forum state)

General Personal Jurisdiction (personam)

A claim that arose anywhere in the world (continuous and systematic contacts with the state)

Hanson v. Denckla

A defendant is subject to personal jurisdiction only if the defendant purposefully avails itself of the privilege of conducting activities in the forum state.

Garble v. Darue Engineering

A federal court may have jurisdiction over a state cause of action, if the action has a substantial federal component in actual controversy, and federal jurisdiction would not disrupt the balance of labor between state and federal courts. Holding: national interest in providing federal forum for federal tax litigation is sufficiently substantial to support the exercise of federal question jurisdiction over the disputed issue on removal, which would not distort an division labor between state and federal courts, provided or assumed by Congress. Facts: Grable filed state law claim against Darue to quiet title to property, who was given deed to land after IRS seized Grable's land because of federal tax delinquency. In order to show that it still had superior title to the property, Grable had to show that the IRS did not properly serve it with process, which is a proposition of federal law.

Attachment

A formal process by which the state takes control over someones property.

Carnival Cruise Lines, Inc. v. Shute

A forum selection clause is not fundamentally unfair solely because the clause was not negotiated.

McGee v. International Life Insurance Co.

A state court has jurisdiction over an out-of-state company if the company has substantial connections with the state. - TX insurance company's sale of insurable policy to a policy holder in CA sufficed to give CA court jdx over the insurance co for a dispute concerning the policy. - Reason: International life insurance co purposefully mailed an insurance policy to CA. - Rule: a single contact can be enough, if it's a substantial contact and if the claim arises directly from it. However, contact must be purposeful.

Long arm statute

A state statute that permits a state to exercise jurisdiction over nonresident defendants.

Long arm statute

A state statute that permits a state to obtain personal jurisdiction over nonresident defendants. A defendant must have "minimum contacts" with that state for the statute to apply.

Notice

Before the court can issue a judgment that affects an individual's rights or interests, it must provide appropriate notice and an opportunity to be heard

In personam

Binding the person, must be personal. Service of process on person within territorial limits.

In rem jurisdiction

Court jurisdiction over a defendant's property.

Bremen v. Zapata Off-Shore

Court upheld forum-selection clause because parties were sophisticated and meticulous effort was put into the contract - Holding: This was a valid forum clause provision because the cruise-line had a legitimate interest and this was purely routine and nearly identical to every commercial passage contract issued by D.

Long Arm Statutes and Minimum Contacts

Courts can exercise personal jurisdiction over certain out-of-state defendants based on activities that took place within the state. In these cases, the defendant must have had sufficient contacts, or minimum contacts, with that state to justify the jurisdiction.

28 USC 1332

Established the Diversity and Amount in Controversy Requirements

Mullane v. Central Hanover Bank

Facts: Bank (a.k.a. trustees) sues beneficiaries (Mullane assigned as guardian). Bank wants to pool the trusts so they try to settle so that from a "set date forward" the bank can't be sued for previous mismanagement. Bank needs to provide notice because possible beneficiaries could be harmed. Consistent with NY Statute/Pennoyer notice requirement, Bank sent notice via publication (newspaper). Rule: "Notice is constitutionally required to be reasonably calculated to apprise interested parties of the pendency of the action and afford them an opportunity to present their objections." · For known beneficiaries (name and address) notice NEED have been sent via mail.

FRCP 12(b)(1)

Failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted

International Shoe v. Washington

For a defendant not present within the territory of a forum to be subjected to a court's in personam jurisdiction, due process requires that the defendant have certain minimum contacts with the forum such that the maintenance of the suit does not offend traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice. - Int. Shoe (d) failure to pay unemployment fund Washington State (p) - Int. Shoe Del. Corp. - PPB Missouri Int. Shoe moved to set aside notice on grounds no agent or PPB in Wash. - Sufficient contacts in WASH.

J. McIntyre Machinery, Ltd. v. Nicastro

For a defendant to be subject to a state's personal jurisdiction, it must purposefully avail itself of the privilege of conducting activities within the forum State, thus invoking the benefits and protections of its laws. P was injured by D's machine in NJ, but the machine was manufactured in England, where D was incorporated and operates; D arguing no PJ McIntyre v. Nicastro -2011 - P/A and Fairness - Stream of commerce English company sells their machines (annual convention/tradeshow) to Ohio, reaches out only to Ohio...Separate Company in Ohio sells the finished product to other states including NJ...P is injured in NJ while working on one of the Machine...P sues the English Company in NJ...Does the English Company have purposeful availment in NJ? · NO Majority Opinion in McIntyre

BMS v. Superior Court California

For a state court to assert specific jurisdiction, there must be an affiliation between the forum state and the specific claim at issue. Ps were CA residents and non-residents suing alleging Plavix, a prescription drug, damaged their health; non-residents did not get Plavix through CA physicians or from other CA sources or claim treatment was in CA Holding: Not adequate connection for PJ. There must be an affiliation between the forum and the underlying controversy, principally an activity or occurrence that takes place in the forum state and is therefore subject to regulation BMS's activities that are not connected to this action but connect them to CA are NOT sufficient

Louisville & Nashville Railroad v. Mottley

For a suit to arise under the Constitution and laws of the United States, giving a federal court jurisdiction to hear the case, a plaintiff must allege a cause of action based upon those laws or that Constitution.

Fed Rule of Civ Pro 4

Governs service of process & has two functions; (1) to provide constitutionally adequate notice to parties to a lawsuit (2) to act as the formal means by which a court asserts personal jurisdiction over the defendant

quasi in rem jurisdiction

Jurisdiction that allows a plaintiff who obtains a judgment in one state to try to collect the judgment by attaching property of the defendant located in another state. (capped at property value)

Attachment

Legal process by which the state or government takes control or seizes someone else's property, then secures a judgment or will be sold to satisfy the attachment

Shippitsa Ltd. V. Slack

Maintaining a website that automatically redirects users to an alternate is not enough to confer personal jurisdiction over a nonresident. Test for Internet-based PJ ... Zippo test: (1) where a website is nothing more than a passive advertisement, the court must decline to exercise PJ; (2) where a website facilitates contractual relationships and the knowing and repeated transmission of computer files over the internet, PJ is proper; ad (3) where website falls somewhere in between, "the exercise of jurisdiction s determined by the level of interactivity and commercial nature of the exchange of information that occurs on the website." Calder Test: When effects of intentionally tortious conduct in forum, there is enough for P/A o Distinguished here: Must be DIRECTED at the forum state

Stream of Commerce

Merely placing products into the "stream of commerce" will not alone generate sufficient minimum contacts with each of the states the products may reach, unless a defendant has made efforts to market in the forum state or otherwise purposefully availed himself of the state's resources.

Carnival Cruise Lines v. Shute

Ms. Shute injured on cruise ship (Slip and fall = tort claim). Admiralty law Federal Question, gives federal courts jurisdiction. Bring suit in WA. However, the Shute's tickets for the cruise contained a Forum Selection Clause which said they could only bring suit in FL. SCOTUS upheld the Forum Selection Clause as valid.

Mullane v. Central Hanover Bank & Trust Co.

Notice must be 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.

Gunn v. Minton

P lost on patent-infringement case because of poor lawyer representation and sued for legal malpractice; argued that since the claim was based on an alleged error in a patent case, it arises under federal patent law which federal courts can only decide 28 USC Section 1338(a)) - Factors to look at to determine where a case that originates in state court might also arise under federal law: o (1) The case necessarily deals with a federal issue o (2) The issue is actually disputed- o (3) The issue is substantial o (4) The federal forum can hear the case without disrupting the balance between federal and state judicial responsibility (Smith factors)

World-wide facts

Ps purchased Audi in NY and when driving through OK, car caught fire and were severely burned; action brought in OK against retailer and wholesale distributor in OK for PL; Audi wants this to be in Federal Court FORESEEABILITY- Can a D reasonably foresee/anticipate being hauled into court? Not enough that it is foreseeable that the car would be in OK If a corporation purposefully avails itself of the privilege of conducting activities with the forum state, it has clear notice that it is subject to suit there and can act to alleviate the risk of burdensome litigation. Holding: Although D had a contact (the car), they are not subject to jurisdiction because they did not purposefully avail themselves to the jurisdictional privileges

Worldwide Volkswagen v. Woodson

Rule: A non-resident D must purposely avail himself of the forum state's privileges & protections for that state to have personal jurisdiction over him unless the case pertains to a product connected with defendant's business that was brought into the forum state by P. - AZ. Accident in OK as they were passing through. Sued the entire car distribution chain in OK; even though the only contact with the state was the accident. Rule: Need both relatedness AND purposeful availment- Foreseeability is NOT ENOUGH

Specific Jurisdiction

Specific Jurisdiction Framework 1. Relatedness Shoe/Shaffer 2. Purposeful Availment Hanson 3. Fairness Asahi (Traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice) Fairness only applies when P/A is weak

Minimum contacts test

TEST: Activities must be continuous and systematic

FRCP 4(k)

Territorial limits of effective service. DC is limited to the underlying state.

In personalm jurisdiction

The court has power over a person because of that's persons connection with the forum; actual notice must be given

Purposeful Availment (Minimum Contacts)

The court must examine whether the defendant has purposefully availed itself of the benefits and protections of the forum state.

Personal jurisdiction

The court's power to impose its decisions on the particular parties in a lawsuit.

Pennoyer v. Neff

Under the Due Process Clause, no person is subject to the jurisdiction of a court unless she voluntarily appears in the court, is found within the state, resides in the state, or has property in the state that the court has attached. - Neff (p) failed to pay Mitchell for legal work. - - Mitchell sued in OR state court. - Neff was not served with process. - Mitchell published notice of summons. - Default judgment - Mitchell seized property - Bought by Pennoyer (d) - Neff did not voluntarily appear or receive service in that state. - OREGON LACKED IN PERSONAM JURISDICTION

Quasi in rem jurisdiction

Use of property to gain jurisdiction in an unrelated matter; subjecting to suit with threat of seizing property owned in that forum even through D is not a resident of the forum

Consent Jurisdiction

Voluntary Consent - Explicit consent Involuntary Consent - Waiver Ex. If you fail to raise 12(b)(2) in your first response, it is waived 12(h)(2) INVOLUNTARY CONSENT

General Jurisdiction

When you have GJ, you can be sued in the forum for anything; even matters unrelated GJ is when you are "essentially at home: - Corporation: Place of incorporation and principle place of business - Natural Persons: Domiciled/residence (your home)

Specific Personal Jurisdiction

Where claim arises from D's contact within the forum.

In rem jurisdiction

You sue the property rather than the person; actual notice not always necessary.

28 USC 1338(a)

· *Gunn—state law malpractice action arising from lawyer's misstep in federal question case (patent §1338(a)) see below. o Case within case: need to litigate patent claim within malpractice claim to determine whether can recover. o *Rule 4 req.