Civil Procedure I Outline
Professor Donahue, Fall 2006
Case Book: Civil Procedure by Ides & May
Acquiring Jurisdiction over the Parties to a Lawsuit………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 2
Introduction……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 2
Pennoyer v. Neff and the Rule of Territoriality……………………………………………………………………………….. 2
Traditional Bases of Jurisdiction…………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 2
I. Personal Jurisdiction…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 2
II. In Rem and Quasi In Rem Jurisdiction…………………………………………………………………………………………… 3
III. Corporations and the Traditional Bases of Jurisdiction……………………………………………………………….. 3
Long-Arm Jurisdiction………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 3
I. Statutory Limits on the Assertion of Long-Arm Jurisdiction…………………………………………………………….. 3
II. International Shoe and the “Minimum Contacts” Test……………………………………………………………………. 3
III. “Minimum Contacts”: The “Purposeful Availment” Requirement………………………………………………… 4
IV. “Minimum Contacts”: The Relatedness Requirement……………………………………………………………………… 5
V. The Reasonableness Requirement………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 6
“Minimum Contacts” and the Traditional Bases of Jurisdiction…………………………………………………….. 6
Exercising Jurisdiction Under Federal Long-Arm Provisions………………………………………………………….. 6
Challenging Lack of Jurisdiction over the Defendant…………………………………………………………………….. 7
Subject Matter Jurisdiction……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 8
Overview: General Principles of Subject Matter Jurisdiction……………………………………………………….. 8
Subject Matter Jurisdiction in Federal Courts……………………………………………………………………………….. 8
Federal Question Jurisdiction…………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 8
Diversity Jurisdiction……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 9
Supplemental Jurisdiction…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 9
Removal Jurisdiction………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 10
Challenging a Court’s Subject Matter Jurisdiction……………………………………………………………………… 10
Venue, Transfer, and Forum Non Conveniens…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 11
Introduction……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 11
Venue in State Courts………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 11
Venue in Federal Courts…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 11
Forum Non Conveniens…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 12
Challenging Forum Selection………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 12
Service of Process and Notice……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 13
Introduction……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 13
Mechanics of Service: Rule 4…………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 13
The Due Process Right to Notice…………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 14
Notice and Hearing When Property is Attached……………………………………………………………………………… 14
The Erie Doctrine………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 15
Overview: The Law to be Applied in Federal and State Courts……………………………………………………….. 15
The Erie Doctrine: The Law to Be Applied in Diversity and Supplemental Jurisdiction Cases……….. 15
Track One: Federal Statutes and the Supremacy Clause………………………………………………………………… 15
Track Two: The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure…………………………………………………………………………. 16
Track Three: Federal Procedural Common Law…………………………………………………………………………….. 16
Acquiring Jurisdiction over the Parties to a Lawsuit
Introduction
§ Full Faith and Credit Clause – requires the courts of each state to enforce valid judgments rendered by their sister states; and, if a state refused to honor a valid sister state judgment, it could be ordered to do so by the U.S. Supreme Court
§ Capias ad respondendum – practice of arresting defendants in civil suits in order to exercise jurisdiction
o gave way to personally serving the defendant w/ a copy of the summons
§ Due Process – “traditional notions of fairplay and substantial justice”
o protects sovereignty of the States
o ensures fairness to defe
for money damages instituted by attaching a defendant’s house or other real or personal property
D. Can only determine interests in the specific property that was attached as the basis for jurisdiction
E. Harris v. Balk
§ MD obtained jurisdiction over Balk by attaching a debt that Harris owed him
§ Widely reviled and no longer good law [overruled by Shaffer v. Heitner]
o Presence of the property alone is not enough, have to consider contacts of the D
III. Corporations and the Traditional Bases of Jurisdiction
§ Corporations consent to jurisdiction in order to do business in the area
§ State of incorporation can exercise jurisdiction as well as where it has its principle place of business
Long-Arm Jurisdiction
I. Statutory Limits on the Assertion of Long-Arm Jurisdiction
A. Using long-arm Statutes
1. Due Process Clause- sets outer boundary for how far court can reach in obtaining jurisdiction
2. Long-Arm Statute – if there is no statute that allows jurisdiction, then there is none
§ then have to asses if that statute falls within the constitution
B. Tailored or Specific-Act Statutes
§ Carefully indicate the circumstances under which jurisdiction may be taken over an out-of-state defendant
C. Due-Process-Type Statutes
§ Allows court to assert jurisdiction over an out-of-state defendant to maximum extent allowed by the Constitution
D. Federal Courts and State Long-Arm Statutes
§ Under Rule 4(k)(1)(A), federal court must “borrow” jurisdiction statutes of the state in which it sits
§ May sometimes exercise jurisdiction under a federal long-arm statute rather than borrowing the state statute
II. International Shoe and the “Minimum Contacts” Test
§ have jurisdiction if defendant has such minimum contacts w/ the forum that exercise of jurisdiction does not offend traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice
§ purposefully availed itself of the privilege of conducting activities in the state
o reciprocity – gain jurisdiction b/c owe the state obligations in return for the benefits of doing business – protections of the laws
§ lawsuit arises out of or relates to purposeful contacts à specific jurisdiction
§ contacts are so extensive that law suit doesn’t need to arise from those contacts à general jurisdiction
§ exercising jurisdiction must be fair and reasonable
§ presence is established when there are “continuous and systematic” activities in the forum
Current analysis used to answer the minimum contacts test:
1. Does D come within the state long-arm statute?
2. Would assertion of jurisdiction violate Due Process?; Minimum Contacts
3. Would it be unfair and unreasonable, based on Gestalt factors, to assert jurisdiction?
