| A | B |
|---|
| Subject Matter Jurisdiction | term used to denote whether a court can hear a prticular type of dispute. Two kinds: General Jurisdiction and Specific Jurisdiction |
| General Jurisdiction | A court that can hear any kind of claim by any persons unless there is specific authority saying that it cannot hear a particular case. |
| Specific Jurisdiction | A court that can hear only those cases that are specifically authorizied |
| Jurisdiction of Federal Courts? | Specific Limited Jurisdiction. Federal question or diversity of citizenship |
| Jurisdiction of State Courts? | General and specific jurisdiction |
| Rule 11 | Lawyer's responsibility. Discourages frivolous lawsuits. Stop think investigate research |
| Rule 8(a)(1)(2) | Complaint for negligence; short plain statement of the grounds upon which the court's jdx depends, of the claim showing entitled to relief, demand for judgment for the relief |
| Pennoyer v Neff | Service by publication does not confer jdx. For per. jdx: person must bepresent at time of service, the person consents to appear in court, the person is a resident of the state, the person owns property at the time of the filing. Limits state power. |
| Hess v Palowski | By driving on MA hwy, hess enjoyed the rights and privileges (quid pro quo) conferred by operating his car there. Thus he impliedly consented to be subject to jdx in MA. Defendant's rights must be weighed against plaintiff's rights to bring action in a manner convenient for plaint. |
| International Shoe v Washington | Due process requires that the def. have minimum contacts with the state such that the maintenance of the suit does not offend the notions of fair play and substantial justice. Minimum contacts must be reasonable. Look to quality and nature of contacts. |
| Long Arm Statute | The way that states assert jdx over non- residents |
| Elements of Hawaii Long Arm Statute | must conduct business in the state, committ a tortious act in the state. |
| World Wide VW | It is not enough that a product finds its way into a state to subject an out of state manufacturer to Pjdx. There must be a reason to anticipate being "haled into court" there. SOC + Expectation |
| White's SOC Theory | Inject Product into SOC + Expectation = Pjdx. |
| Brennan's SOC Theory | Inject product into SOC = Pjdx. |
| Asahi Metal | Unreasonable to assert jdx over Asahi b/c the burdent on the def. is severe while the interests of the plaintiff a and the state of CA are light. New idea for jdx: SOC + Expectation+Purposeful direction = Pjdx. 4 to 4 vote! |
| Burger King v Rudzewicz | Did the defend. purposefully est. minimum contacts with the forum state? Look to prior negotiations and contemplated future consequences. Agreement entered into in FL governed by FL law, def availed himself of benefits and protections of Fl laws. No unfair surprise, should have reasonably expected being haled into court in FL. |
| Due process requirements | minimum contacts, purposeful availment, forseeability, fairness, reciprocity, convenience, service |
