CIVIL PROCEDURE OUTLINE ~ MILLER
I. PERSONAL JURISDICTION (Power to bring parties before court and bind them to judgment)
a. Introduction
i. Substantive Due Process
1. Court has power to act upon the PERSON or PROPERTY through
a. Minimum Contacts with the forum State and
b. Long Arm Statute accepting such jurisdiction
ii. Three Types of Jurisdiction
1. In Personam
a. Forum State (State in which we are suing) has jurisdiction over the Defendant’s person
b. Judgment in forum State in entitled to full faith and credit
2. In Rem
a. When Court has power over Defendant’s property or status
i. Ex: Action to quiet title; dissolution of marriage
3. Quasi in Rem
a. QIR II: Power of the Court to attach or garnish property to gain jurisdiction over Defendant (Shaffer v Heitner requires this to be tested under minimum contacts standard of International Shoe)
b. Judgment affects only the property seized
c. QIR I: Involves the rights to the property itself
b. Traditional Test (Pennoyer v Neff)
i. Presence in Forum State and
1. Burnham v Superior Court: Temporary presence in state unrelated to activity in lawsuit falls within province of test
ii. Defendant must be served with notice of lawsuit against him within forum state
1. Even in defendant is only within the forum state a few hours, he may be served with process there
2. Service on a plane flying over forum State is valid
c. Modern Basis (Defendants Must have Minimum Contacts, Domicile, or Consent)
i. Minimum Contacts (International Shoe v Washington)
1. Suit does not offend “traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice”
a. Relatedness of Claim to contact
i. Arising from activity in the State
ii. Systematic and Continous
b. Convenience (does not need to be the best, must be so inconvenient that a party is unfairly put at a severe disadvantage in comparison to his opponent”
c. Forum State’s interests
d. Other
i. Plaintiff’s interest in obtaining convenient and effective relief
ii. The interstate judicial system’s interest in obtaining the most efficient resolution of controversies
iii. The shared interest of the state in furthering fundamental substantive social policies
2. Constitutional elaborations
a. Activities must be systematic and continuous (Helicopteros)
b. Activities must be purposely directed towards the forum State (Asahi)
c. Defendant must purposely avail himself of the privileges of the forum State
i. Stream of Commerce: whether or not it equals purposeful availment?
ii. O’Connor: Stream of Commerce +: Asahi
d. Possibility of litigation must be foreseeable (WWVW)
e. There must be connection between the litigation, Defendant, and forum State
i. Mere presence of property is not enough unless Defendant has necessary minimum contacts (Shaffer)
3. Domicile
a. Jurisdiction over person domiciled within forum State, even if temporarily not within the State
b. Residence – current dwelling place
c. Intent to indefinitely remain
i. Only one domicile at a time
ii. Person must intent to make that place his home, for the time at least
4. Consent
a. Jurisdiction over person by consent, even if no contacts with forum State
b. Consent by filing an action
i. Counterclaim can be filed against original Plaintiff and he cannot subsequently dismiss the action
c. Advance Consent
i. In Contract; designating an agent
d. Voluntary appearance in Court
d. Long Arm Statutes
i. Scope
1. Once “minimum contacts” are established, the State must still have legislation authorizing its courts to accept such jurisdiction
2. Jurisdiction may be barred on citizenship, property, ownership, or tortious acts in forum State
3. Unlimited: some States give their courts full power to accept all constitutional bases of jurisdiction
4. Limited: Some States specify in detail when Court may accept jurisdiction
e. Jurisdiction Over Corporations
i. Resident Corporations
1. Any action can be brought against a corporation incorporated in forum State
2. For in personam jurisdiction
a. Resident only if incor
between US citizens and foreigners
iii. Amount
1. The amount in controversy does not matter if there is a federal question involved
b. Diversity – 1332
i. Scope
1. Controversy is between citizens of different States or between citizens of a State and citizens or subjects of a foreign state AND the action is for more than $75k.
2. Aggregation of claims; some claims may be added together to satisfy jurisdictional amount
a. One P and One D – can aggregate claims : do not need to be related
b. 1 P and several D – P cannot aggregate claims against all Ds.
i. But if joint claim (all liable for same claim): not aggregation
c. Several P and 1 D – can aggregate if enforcing single action (like quiet title)
3. Federal courts may still decline to exercise jurisdiction
a. When abstention doctrine is used – Federal courts defer to State courts based on the difficulty of questions of State law presented or the related litigation in State court
b. When diversity is obtained from improper or collusive joinder of parties
ii. Complete Diversity
1. No one Plaintiff can be a citizen of the same State as any one Defendant
2. Domicile determines diversity (2 part test)
a. The place you are physically located in
b. With the intent to remain there indefinitely
3. Diversity must exist at the time the Complaint is filed with the Clerk
a. It need not exist at the time of trial or when the cause of action arose
4. Citizenship of Corporations
a. The state(s) of incorporation AND
b. State where principal place of business is located
i. Executive offices vs physical operation? Go with latter
ii. Operations in tons of states? Go with executive offices: nerve center
5. Partnerships and LLP
a. States of all partners
6. Nonresident US citizen
a. Domiciled abroad – not a citizen of a state, but also not an alien
7. Permanent Alien
a. Domiciled state
