Civil Procedure I Outline

I. Personal Jurisdiction
 
A.      Introduction
·         Citizenship: person is a citizen of state where they are domiciled: residence plus intent to remain
o        intent to remain: don’t have definite intention to leave at some future point
o        when filing as personal representative, use citizenship of decedent at time of death
·         2 Part Analysis
(1) State Long Arm Statue – how far the state is willing to go
(2) Constitution – what is allowed under due process (nexus and notice)
·         Pennoyer v. Neff: The Origins of Personal Jurisdiction
o        for state to assert personal jurisdiction, must be within the state or there must be waiver
§         once you step foot within the state for any reason, can be served and subject to jurisdiction
o        Types of Jurisdiction (at the time)
§         in personam – adjucating person within the forum state
§         in rem – adjucating property in the forum state
§         quasi in rem – property in forum state, attach to be able to adjucate person outside forum state
ú          property must be attached at the time suit is filed; if done, constructive notice OK
o        to assert jurisdiction, must have power and notice
§         in personam: serving process to individual within the state establishes both
§         quasi in rem: attaching establishes power, attachment and constructive notice give notice
o        required to give full faith and credit to another state’s judgment unless that state did not have jurisdiction
 
B.      In Personam Jurisdiction: power over the D himself
1. Two Types: the extent of Ds contact with the forum state determines what type of jurisdiction they are subject to
a. General: D can be sued n that forum on a claim that arose anywhere in the world
§         appropriate where D has continuous and systematic or substantial ties with the forum state
ú          domicile in the form
ú          corporation is incorporated in the forum
§         if non-resident it served while temporarily in the state, the court will have general jurisdiction
ú          personal service of process sufficient, even if no minimum contacts [Burnham] §         Rule 4(k)(2) Federal Claims Outside State Court Jurisdictions
ú          when claim arises under federal law, and D does not have sufficient minimum contacts with any individual state but jurisdiction is consistent with US Const/laws, serving a summons or filing waiver establishes jurisdiction [sufficient contacts with US as whole, not with any state] ·         extending minimum contacts to national level in international realm
b. Specific: the D is being sued on a claim that arises from activities in the form
§         can be discreet and insular contact – ie Car Accident
2. Constitutional Test
a. Traditional Bases of in Personam Jurisdiction (from Pennoyer)
§         Presence: if D served with process in the forum, it gives the forum general personal jurisdiction
§         Agent: service of process of D’s agent in the forum creates general jurisdiction
§         Domicile: D is domiciled in the forum gives general jurisdiction
§         Consent: D consents to personal jurisdiction
b. New Standard: Minimum Contacts and Fair Play and Traditional Notions of Fair Play
§         International Shoe: to be subject to a state’s jurisdiction, must have certain minimum contacts such that maintenance of suit does not offend traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice
ú          Two Part Assessment: (1) Contacts and (2) Fairness
ú          Factors:
(1) presence in the state
(2)  systematic and continuous activities within the state
(3) enjoys the benefits and protections of state laws
(4) whether it is reasonable to expect the D to defend itself in the state
ú          Frequency v. Relatedness
 
Gives Rise to Claim
Unrelated to Claim
Isolated and Casual
II – Usually
III – NO
Continuous and Systematic
I – YES
IV – ? (more uncertain)
 
(1) Minimum Contacts
ú          Sufficiency of Contacts – Relatedness and Purposeful Availment
·         Relatedness: claim must be related to contact with forum (gives rise to specific jurisdiction)
·         Purposeful Availment: D must have caused the contact of the state
o        Hanson: essential there be some act by which D purposefully avails itself of privilege of conducing activities within the forum, thus invoking its benefits and protections
ú          Foreseeability:
·         foreseeability alone is insufficient – must see if Ds conduct and connection with forum state are such that a reasonable person should anticipate being hauled into court there
o        VW: buy Audi from VW in NY, crashed in OK – can’t bring products liability suit in O when VW wasn’t selling/manufacturing/servicing there
·         Stream of Commerce: when a company puts product into the stream of commerce, when are minimum contacts satisfied? [Asahi 4-4 split] o        Brennan: (1) put into stream of commerce, (2) could reasonably anticipate that would reach the forum state
o        O’Connor: (1) put into stream of commerce, (3) could reasonably anticipate that would reach the forum state, (3) intent or purpose to serve that state
ú          Effects: you don’t have to actually step in the forum if you can reasonably expect to have an effect in the forum which would expose you to lawsuit [Jones – defamation in newspaper] (2) Reasonableness: courts look at
ú          burden on the D
ú          Ps interest and convenience
ú          interest of the forum state
ú          interstate judicial system in efficient resolution
§         Internet Cases
ú          look at the interactiveness of the website and the commercial nature of the exchange of information that occurs and determine if analogous to a store front
·         Factors: interactivity, traditional business contacts, sales generated, use by residents
ú          Palovich: provided the source code to get around a copyright program, court determined no jurisdiction just because knew CA residents would be harmed
·         here: passive website, merely provided information
 
C.      In Rem Jurisdiction
1. Old Rule: attachment at the outset of litigation sufficient [Pennoyer] 2. New Rule: where there is property in the state that serves as a basis for jurisdiction but is unrelated to the cause of action,
     there must be sufficient minimum contacts with the state to support jurisdiction over the D [Shaffer] o        makes quasi in rem and in rem insufficient
o        physical presence of property within the state is relevant because provides evidence of minimum contacts
§         presumption that there is contact between the owner and the property
§         property in forum ma still suffice to create general jurisdiction under minimum contacts assessment
 
D.      Raising Claims of Personal Jurisdiction
·         Common Law: special appearance – allows D to come into state solely for purpose of contesting jurisdiction
o        if enter state and fail to make special appearance or raise other issues = consent
·         Rule 12 – rules less strict than special appearance
(b) defense can be raised in the answer or in pre-trial motion, can combine with others
(h): waived if D doesn’t raise objection in response to complaint
·         if challenged, P must pr