Select Page

Contracts
University of Kansas School of Law
Hines, Laura J.

–         Personal Jurisdiction
o       In Personam
§         Statute
·        Does the Long-Arm Statute Authorize Jurisdiction?
·        State long arm statutes
·        FRCP 4k – Long Arm Statutes
o       Rule 4K – Federal Courts Sitting in State
o       (1)(a) – Look to state long-arm statutes
o       (1)(b) – Bulge Jurisdiction – Look to joinder rules in 14 and 19, get bulge jurisdiction of 100 miles of federal courthouse
§         When there are certain parties added under rules 14 and 19, federal court gets a “Bulge” of 100 miles to go across state lines and join parties, etc.
o       (1)(c) – Interpleader Statute – “nationwide service” – you can serve anyone located in the United Statute, because it is an interpleader statute claim
o       (1)(d) – Any Statute
·        4(k)(2)
o       Courts have jurisdiction over
§         Foreign D not subject to jurisdiction in any state
§         P has Federal Law claim (not a state claim)
§         Exercise of jurisdiction is consistent with the Consittution (minimum contacts with US as a whole as US is the forum state– 5th Amendment)
·        14th Amendment
·        The farther federal reach runs a little in the face of the Due Process Clause rights which take into consideration the burden of the Defendant
·        How far the state goes in its reach for jurisdiction, sometimes it reaches less far, sometimes it reaches as far as the constitution allows
·        3 Kinds of States
o       Specific Detailed Provisions
o       Florida
§         We go as far as the constitution goes
o       California
§         The language of the statute looks like it is doing the first type, but the courts rule that it is actually doing the second type
§         Constitution – 14th Amendment – Due Process Clause
·        Minimum Contacts
General Jurisdiction
Continuous and Systematic contacts + unrelated claim
JURISDICTION
Specific Jurisdiction
Continuous and systematic contacts + give rise to claim
JURISDICTION
Nature
And
Volume
Of
Contacts
Relatedness of contacts to claim
 
Single/Isolated Activity + unconnected
NOJURISDICTION
Specific Jurisdiction
Single/Isolated Activity + Highly Related Claim
JURISDICTION
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
      
 
 
 
   SPECIFIC JURISDICTION
§         Purposeful Availment Test
·        Was there purposeful availment to the benefits and protections of the state, or just unilateral activity? – Hanson v. Denkla?
o       McGee v. International Life was purposeful availment when the insurance policy sold in a forum state, but the only contacts were through mail.
o       Hanson v. Denkla  not purposeful availment because bought insurance poicy in NJ, then moved to florida, so company never purposefully availed itself to florida.
o       Corporations
§         Stock is property – Shaffer
§         Directors and Officers – Just because associated with a company isn’t enough to show regulatory interest in a state. No expectation of subjecting themselves to jurisdiction – Shaffer
§         General Jurisdiction
·        Main place of business (Home Office)
·        State of incorporation
o       Manufacturer
§         TEST
·        Contacts – Asahi – Use all 3 tests (Comp. Parts. Only?)
o       O’Connor’s Plus Factors to see if purposeful availment
§         Advertising in a forum state
§         Designing a product for market in forum state
·        Catering specifically to the market?
§         Establishing channels for providing advice in forum state
§         Distribution Network including forum state
·        That product as is has to be sold to that state by THIS manufacturer
·        *Just placing into the stream of commerce is not purposeful availment
o       Brennan
§         Knowledge of Regular and Extensive Sales to the forum State is sufficient for minimum contacts

parties actually conduct themselves regardless of contractual language)
§         Materials bought?
§         Actions show notice of forum state authority?
·        Brennan’s Sliding Scale – Burger King
o       Once Minimum Contacts established, D must show unreasonable
o       More contacts, more showing required, less contacts, less showing required
§         WWV v. Burger King
·        Car dealership v. Franchisee
·        No directed sales to OK (one-time deal), while Franchisee sought contact with Fl and long term relationship
o       Internet/Website
§         Effects Test applied? – Calder Case
·        Foreseeable effects will affect a person who lives there…is it where P is located or where your effects are felt?
·        This is one way to find minimum contacts
·        Issues
o       D’s knowledge it will harm someone? – Pavlovich
o       Doesn’t have anything to do with benefiting from forum state
·        This will be expanded if no other forum for P under Necessity Jurisdiction
§         Website Spectrum
·        Just Posting Info. V. Doing Business/Interactive
Specific Jurisdiction – Review!!!
            – Minimum Contacts
– Purposeful Availment
                        – Products
                                    – Stream of Commerce – Component Part Manufacturer (maybe
subject – Asahi split, WWV yes),
Manufacturer (yes), Distributor (if national, yes, if regional, maybe
not), Retailer (no)
o       Asahi – 3 different Opinions
o       WWV
–         Contracts
Contract alone isn’t enough, you have to have