Select Page

Civil Procedure I
University of Toledo School of Law
Kilbert, Kenneth

Civil Procedure Outline
1. Jurisdiction Over Persons Or Things
a. Traditional Basis-5th &14th Amendments
5th- No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; not shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal cases to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of live, liberty, of property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation

14th- All persons born on naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; not shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; not deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

The Full Faith and Credit Clause
Article IV, Section 1, of the U.S. Constitution—provides that the various states must recognize legislative acts, public records, and judicial decisions of the other states within the United States. It states that “Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State.”

i. Method of Analysis
1. Look for traditional bases of jurisdiction first
2. If none, then look at long-arm statutes
a. Minimum contact
b. Fair, just, and reasonable
ii. Definitions/Rules
1. In personam jurisdiction
a. Definition
i. Provides courts with a basis for entirely determining controversies involving personal obligation.
ii. It is jurisdiction over the defendant’s person, and imposes a personal liability (to the full extent of damages) on one person in favor of another
b. 3 methods to satisfy due process:
i. Domicile- suit in the defendant’s home state-service on D in D’s home state
1. Individuals
a. Domiciled in a state with the intention of making the place his home (tax payments, driver’s license, employment records, bank accounts, vehicle registration)
1. Domicile=current dwelling place + intent to remain indefinitely
2. Corporations
a. Where incorporated
b. Where the clear concentration of business is (nerve center)
1. Where extensive benefits received
2. Where there is no great inconvenience
c. Consent & Waiver
i. Consent
1. Express
a. Contract
b. Forum selection clause
c. Choice of law clause
d. Consent as condition of doing business
2. Implied
a. Consent to Determine Jurisdiction
b. Statutory
c. Failure to object; waived under 12(g) or 12 (h)(1), or if not contested under 12(b)(2)
d. When challenging JOPOT
ii. Waiver
1. Plaintiff
a. Express, or implied by filing suit
2. Defendant
a. Express, or implied through a general appearance, or failure to object jurisdiction
iii. Counterclaim
1. Defendant (plaintiff is counter claim), avails himself to forum jurisdiction when filing a counter claim
d. Transient Jurisdiction(Burmham)
i. Includes service in forum state
ii. Service of process on the defendant within the state in which the court sits
1. When the defendant’s presence there was
a. Only intended to be brief, and
b. Is unrelated to the controversy raised by the plaintiff’s claim
2. Courts are split over traditional basis of service being completed within the forum state and whether D actually availed himself to forums state (e.g. flight rerouted into forum)
2. Quasi-in-rem jurisdiction
a. Apply minimum contacts & fairness test to an analysis of quasi-in-rem jurisdiction (Shaffer v. Heitner)
i. Sufficient minimum contacts
ii. Substantial relation to the cause of action
iii. Fundamental fairness
b. Definition
i. Affects the interests of particular persons in designated property
ii. Operates on property located within the forum and not directly against the individual person.
iii. Binds the parties only with reference to their interests in the property upon which jurisdiction is based-so the value of the judgment cannot exceed the value of the property.
c. In-rem jurisdiction
i. Definition
1. Affects the interests of all persons in a designated property.
2. Focuses on property located within the forum
3. Used to adjudicate questions concerning the ownership and control of such property- questions against the whole world.
4. The theory is to act upon the thing, rather then the rights of individuals.
b. New Basis: In Personam Jurisdiction
i. State Courts
1. Due Process Expanded for in personam jurisdiction
a. 2 main requirements:
i. Meet constitutional Due Process Requirements
ii. Meet State Long-Arm Statue Requirements
b. Absent domicile, consent/waiver, or transient jurisdiction, minimum contacts between the forum state and the defendant is necessary to make the plaintiff’s choice a constitutional forum
c. Policy
i. Unreasonable for D to object as less then a fair exchange for benefits received from the forum
ii. Even if no benefits received, because D acted within the forum to cause the controversy, it’s still fair
iii. Burden of defending
d. Satisfying Due Process
i. Sufficient Contacts
1. Service of process on a non-consenting defendant not within a state, when such service is fair based on sufficient contacts with state
2. Rule: 2 elements
a. Minimum Contacts (possibly proven through the following elements) (International Shoe Co. v. Washington)
1. Purposeful availment of benefits and privileges in forum state
2. Contacts based on contracts
3. Stream of commerce contacts (disagreement over 1) whether simple placement of a product into stream of commerce is enough, 2) whether there a

complaint is sufficient to confer in personam jurisdiction over any defendant amenable to service under the forum state’s long-arm statute, under the federal interpleaded statute, under other federal long-arm statutes, or as pertaining to no-state defendants.
2. (1)(A)-(D): Federal courts may generally exercise personal jurisdiction over the following categories of parties:
· (A) State Long-Arm Statutes: Defendants who fall within the State’s long-arm statute
· (B) 100 Mile Bulge rule: Defendants who are third parties, necessary parties, or indispensable parties, who are served within 100 miles of the place from which the summons was issued
· (C) Federal Long-Arm Statute: D’s who are amenable to suit in the district court pursuant to a federal statute providing for national or worldwide service of process (such as the federal interpleaded statute)
3. (2) Federal Claim Outside State Jurisdiction: For a claim that arises under federal law, serving a summons or filing a waiver of service establishes personal jurisdiction over a defendant it:
· the defendant is not subject to jurisdiction if any state’s courts of general jurisdiction; and
· exercising jurisdiction is consistent with the United States Constitution and laws
o P must show
§ 1) that the claim arises under fed law
§ 2) PJ is not available under any situation-specific fed statute
§ 3) D contacts w/ the Nation generally comport with the Con Req.
§ 4) P certainty, based on information readily available to the P and counsel that D is not subject to PJ in any particular State’s court.
o If P show burden shifts to D
§ Must show Jur would be proper in some state. If D proves, P can seek transfer to sate with proper Jur, discontinue the lawsuit and re-file, or challenges D’s assertions
§ If D fails fact finder can infer no state Jur
o Knockout Rule
§ D consents to personal jurisdiction in some other state.
c. Quasi-in-rem Jurisdiction
i. Generally
1. Alternative to personam jurisdiction
a. Only time really effective in present day is where the State is lacking a long arm statute
2. Must commonly employed as a means of obtaining the presence of a defendant in a court by judicial attachment (i.e. seizure) of property belonging to the defendant
a. Property must be located within the state in which the court sits
b. Involves a discrete group of defendants, who claims are not very theoretical