Select Page

Civil Procedure I
University of Toledo School of Law
Klein, James M.

Substantive Due Process: primary restraint of due process
–        Traditional basis of In Personam (against a person): Valid Jurisdiction
o       Present in the state:
§         Pennoyer v. Neff: Every state possesses exclusive jurisdiction over persons and property within its borders. No state can exercise jurisdiction over people or property outside its borders.
§         Transient Jurisdiction (tag- Burnham): Valid unless obtained through fraud or against other judicial proceedings
o       Consent to Jurisdiction:
§         Express: Written or oral
·        By contract: Forum Selection – reasonable test applies
·        By appointment of instate agent
·        By waiver (see notice)
·        Counterclaims – filing in forum state only
·        By not doing something procedurally
§         Implied: nonresident appointment of designated instate official
o       Domiciled – License, registered to vote, vehicle registration, home: intent to stay indefinitely
–        Expanded: Long-Arm Statutes [must satisfy long-arm & due process (fairness and contacts)] o       Unlimited Long Arm – go as far as Due Process (5th or 14th Amendment) will allow
o       Limited Long Arm – specify in detail situation which their court can exercise jurisdiction
o       If no Long-Arm, use rules from Pennoyer v. Neff
–        Specific Jurisdiction (contacts with state gave rise to cause of action)
o       Contacts enough?
§         Systematic and Continuous nature of ∆’s contacts
§         Relation between ∆’s contacts and the cause of action
·        International Shoe: Is jurisdiction valid?—
o       Cause of action arose from the ∆’s systematic and continuous activities in the forum state: YES
o       Cause of action is unrelated to systematic and continuous actions: Case by Case
o       Cause of action arises out of an obligation or liability from single or occasional acts of a corporate agent: Case by Case
o       Cause of action is unrelated to single, isolated activities of a corporate agent or there is only a casual presence of a corporation: NO
§         Magnitude of D’s contacts: Money, nature/size of wrong
§         Minimum Contacts Test
·        Foreseeability – D must reasonably anticipate that activities in forum render it foreseeable that D may be “haled into court” in forum state ( D deliberately engaged in activities in the forum)
·        Purposeful

tantive justice)
o       the burden on the D
o       interest in the forum state of adjudicating the dispute
o       P interest in obtaining convenient and effective relief
o       interest of the interstate judicial system in the most efficient resolution of controversies
o       shared interest of states in furthering fundamental substantive and social policies. 
–        Minimum Contacts Phrases
o       Stream of Commerce
o       Last Event Theory
o       Super-systematic and Continuous (Gen. jurisdiction)
o       Purposeful Availment
o       Unfairly Surprised
o       Benefits and protections of the law
o       Unilateral activity not enough
o       Substantial connection
–        In Rem Jurisdiction: Against property in a forum; no personal liability
o       Must satisfy:
§         Thing(s) of value
§         Territorial requirements
§         Seizure/attachment at beginning of suit