Conflicts of Law
Professor Martha Dragich
University of Missouri School of Law
I. Domicile
a. Individual Domicile Must have:
i. Intent to remain for an indefinite period of time and
ii. Concurrent Physical Presence
1. Constructive may suffice
2. Established no matter how brief
3. Continues even when leaving the domicile for temporary leaves
iii. Once established it remains until the elements are met in a new domicile.
b. Corporation Domicile:
i. Personal Place of Business
1. Determined by Nerve Center Test→ where business is transacted from.
ii. Place of Incorporation
c. Types:
i. Domicile by Origin→ domicile when born given by parent
ii. Domicile by Choice→ domicile by choice
iii. Domicile by Law→ domicile required by law
II. Personal Jurisdiction
a. Statutory Requirement→ Long Arm Statute
b. Constitutional Requirement
i. Types of Jurisdiction
1. In Personam
2. In Rem (Shaffer v. Heitner)→ is still applicable and limited to the value of the property, but now for the property to be attached it must be related to the claim.
a. Absent personal service (presence) or domicile all other situation including in rem must comply w/ minimum contacts.
ii. Types In Personam of Jurisdiction:
1. General→ so continuous & systematic that the form has jurisdiction no matter what case
2. Specific→ Δs contacts are based on the claim which arose in that forum
iii. Traditional Bases or
1. Domicile (General Jurisdiction)
2. Appearance or Waiver
3. Consent
a. Contract→ Forum Selection Clause
b. Statute→ appointment of an agent for process on condition of doing business in the Forum
c. Class Action Lawsuit
d. Appearance
4. Presence (Pennoyer)
iv. Minimum Contacts (International Shoe)
1. Must have sufficient minimum contacts so as not to offend the traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice.
2. Based on the quality and nature of the Δs activities w/ the forum.
3. Contacts and fairness is a two part weighted test in which there must be elements of both contacts and fairness, but not necessarily in equal amounts.
4. Contacts
a. Δ must purposefully availed himself of conducting activity w/in the forum state.
i. Continuous & Systematic activity that is related to the claim is acceptable; (Specific Jurisdiction)
ii. Continuous & Systematic activity unrelated to the claim is acceptable (General Jurisdiction);
iii. Sporadic & Casual activity unrelated to the claim is not acceptable
iv. Sporadic & Casual activity related to the claim may be enough to be acceptable
b. Effects Test (Calder)→ jurisdiction is proper in tort action when Δ conduc
rum State’s interest in adjudicating the dispute
c. Πs interest in obtaining a convenient and effective relief
d. Interest of the interstate judicial system in obtaining the most efficient resolution of controversies
e. Shared interest of the several States in furthering fundamental substantive social policies
6. Burdens
a. Burden on the Δ to present a compelling case that jurisdiction is unfair on these facts
b. Burden on the π to establish minimum contacts
7. Determining Relatedness→ for nonresident Δ’s forum contacts to support exercise of specific jurisdiction there must be a substantial connection between those contacts and the operative facts of litigation.
8. Continuance of Jurisdiction→ once jurisdiction is validly established it follows through then entire proceedings until finished no matter where the Δ’s physical presence is.
v. Historical Progression
1. Pennoyer v. Neff→ Presence is required
2. International Shoe→ May have jurisdiction based on minimum contacts
Shaffer v. Heitner→ In rem is not sufficient in those cases must have minimum
