CivilProcedure Outline
PERSONAL JURISDICTION: judicial power over person/property involved in lawsuit Three Themes: Power of court Notice to party Consent
I. Personal Jurisdiction — Issue: whether it is appropriate for state to exercise PJ over Δ
a. Three Filters: all must be passed to get PJ
i. Federal Constitution: court exercise of power cannot violate due process clause
ii. State Constitution: exercise cannot violate state constitution
iii. Long-arm: must be a statute authorizing the state to exercise jurisdiction over Δ
b. DPC Bases for PJ: domicile, consent, physical presence, minimum contacts
i. Consent: may voluntarily, knowingly, & intelligently consent to PJ in advance
1. Carnival Cruise: consent subject to judicial scrutiny, inclusion of forum-selection clause reasonable b/c limits forums wh/Δ may be potentially sued (clause must be reasonable/related to legitimate purpose/reason)
ii. Physical Presence (Transient jurisdiction): usually presence in state when served sufficient
1. Jurisdiction based on in state service only requires Δ be present in state at time summons & complaint served (Δ need not have any contact w/state)
2. Burnham: CA Divorce (plurality), Scalia: physical presence alone constitute DP
a. Brennan: Δ availed himself of significant benefits of state
b. White: Δ must show transient rule is “so arbitrary & lacking in common sense in so many instances that it should be held violative of due process in every case”
II. Origins: Common Law and Constitution: CL allowed state court to exercise PJ when Δ or property was present w/in state
a. Federal Constitutional limitations: both limitations must be met for valid PJ
Parties directly affected by court action must receive fair & adequate notice of action
Must be property or minimum contacts b/w Δ & forum state (PJ must be fair & reasonable)
i. Due Process Clause (14th Amendment): only attack is direct attack
1. Forbids states from “depriv[ing] any person of life, liberty or property, w/o due process of law”
2. Fair judicial procedure includes limitations on places where Δ can be required to defend lawsuit
ii. Full Faith & Credit Clause (article IV, §1) or Full faith & credit statute (28 USC §1738)
1. Judgment given effect by courts of 2nd state (& federal courts) if 1st had PJ (only collateral attack)
b. IL Constitutional Limitations: Fiduciary Shield Doctrine(Rollins)employer contacts not transferred to employee
c. Types of PJ: In personam In rem Quasi in rem Status
i. Jurisdiction Over Persons (“In Personam”): needed when Π seeking $ judgment
1. To enforce judgment: Δ property seized & sold by sheriff, apply proceeds to payment
2. Bases for PJ: Presence in forum when process served Residence in forum Consent
ii. Jurisdiction Over Property: Π order would establish interest in property
1. Two types of In Rem: Against entire world (in rem) Against specified persons (quasi in rem)
a. In Rem: Π seizes Δ property to satisfy an interest in the property (e.g. title or possession)
b. Quasi: Π attaches or seizes Δ property in order to satisfy prior personal claim against Δ
2. Bases for PJ: Related to property (mortgage foreclosure) or Unrelated to property (unsecured debt)
a. The basis for jurisdiction is presence of property in the state
3. Scope: Government becomes TO of property (have superior rights against all others)
a. Can only recover judgment up to value of property (form of limited jurisdiction)
b. Limited jurisdiction – not binding to everything, only what’s in state
4. Rule: intangible property deemed located where the obligor is located (Shaffer)
a. Intangible Rights: Қ rights, debts …
b. Example: if A lend B $, then A property located where B is (applies even if on vacation)
5. Rule: if dispute over ownership of prop, ordinarily state where property is located will have PJ
a. Exception: if (portable) property stolen, and TO did nothing to cause property to go to other state, forum most likely TO’s state (must have no knowledge/acquiescence of TO)
iii. Jurisdiction Over Status – primarily with divorce cases
1. Basis for PJ: domicile of Π (cannot recover alimony, only get divorce)
III. Modern Constitutional Formulation of Power: DPC “fair play & substantial justice”
a. State Court Jurisdiction: applies to all types of PJ
i. Step 1: Long-arm statute – state statue must first authorize a court to exercise p
self of the opportunity to engage in in-state activities, by distributing its magazines w/in forum
a. Support PJ despite Δ acts had > impact in other states, & Π had few contacts w/forum
c. Corporate Δ: minimum contacts applies to individual as well as corporate Δ (Kulko)
d. Tort: if Δ physically present in forum state, & all elements of tort committed there, then 100% will meet mc
i. Exception: Non-resident motorist situation (non-resident negligently driving through forum state)
ii. Act outside forum must be ‘Purposefully Directed’
iii. Untargeted negligence: does not equal minimum contacts
e. Advertising: World Wide & Asahi – both products cases, court suggesting advertising not enough
i. Yates: hospitals not subject to PJ if not advertising, may be subject to advertising if they advertising
f. Taking Reservations: Hendry, Forrester: reservations/advertising, no PJ (both service cases)
g. Internet: depends on type of website (sliding scale)
i. Passive (merely provides information)
ii. Interactive Websites: consider how interactive site is? How commercial site is?
iii. “Doing Business” (commercial site, can form Қ)
1. Argument: not PJ in every state otherwise would harm economy b/c people not advertise
h. Buyer: IL has adopted 2 approaches to determining if there is jurisdiction over buyer:
i. Empress: consider : who initiated contact where Қ entered (acceptance) where Қ to be performed
ii. Chalek: was buyer active or passive? PJ will exist only over active buyer
i. Δ not act in forum: Δ may have sufficient contacts w/forum even if not act w/in forum
i. Calder: Δ subject to PJ in CA for allegedly defamatory article written in FL
1. Articles circulated in CA, Π lived in CA, Π career centered in CA
