Scribd
Upload
86 views

Civ Pro Outline Best

This document outlines the steps for determining personal jurisdiction in a civil case: 1. Determine if long-arm statute allows jurisdiction. If not, there is no jurisdiction. If so, proceed to constitutional analysis. 2. Analyze whether there is general jurisdiction based on continuous and systematic contacts. If so, there is general jurisdiction. If not, proceed to specific jurisdiction analysis. 3. Analyze whether there are minimum contacts through availment tests like Calder or stream of commerce. If so, determine if there is a nexus between the contacts and the suit. If nexus exists, proceed to determine if jurisdiction would be reasonable. Specific jurisdiction requires minimum contacts and nexus.

Uploaded by

Ted Miller
Copyright
© Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
86 views

Civ Pro Outline Best

This document outlines the steps for determining personal jurisdiction in a civil case: 1. Determine if long-arm statute allows jurisdiction. If not, there is no jurisdiction. If so, proceed to constitutional analysis. 2. Analyze whether there is general jurisdiction based on continuous and systematic contacts. If so, there is general jurisdiction. If not, proceed to specific jurisdiction analysis. 3. Analyze whether there are minimum contacts through availment tests like Calder or stream of commerce. If so, determine if there is a nexus between the contacts and the suit. If nexus exists, proceed to determine if jurisdiction would be reasonable. Specific jurisdiction requires minimum contacts and nexus.

Uploaded by

Ted Miller
Copyright
© Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 2

CIV PRO OUTLINE TED MILLER SECTION THREE

1. STARTING POINT: Look at “Contact Biography” so you know how to do the


analysis below…

Does the long-arm say yes or no?


a. If no, then no jurisdiction.
b. If yes, then proceed to Constitutional General Analysis.

2. Constitutional General Analysis

Can this person or corporation be subjected to general personal


jurisdiction because of mega-contacts, tag, consent, or residency or is
there a forum consent clause? Are the contacts continuous and
systematic?

a. If no, then we have to go look at Constitutional Specific Analysis


below.
b. If yes, then we have general jurisdiction. LL BEAN, YES
PRUDENTIAL, YES

3. Constitutional Specific Analysis

Does the person or corporation have minimum contacts? When we


say minimum contacts, we specifically means availment – and we can
test availment via either Calder, Contracts plus, or Stream of
commerce plus Zippo internet advertising. SHOE = yes VOLKS = no
(Helicopteros = no?* double check)

a. If yes, then go to the question below about nexis.


b. If no, then there will be no specific jurisdiction.
Does the person or corporation have nexis to the incident?

When we are looking at nexis, the best way to do it is to say “if we


took out the minimum contacts we just found, would the law suit still
happen?” if the contacts hypothetically were not there and the
incident still occurred, we are in a unilateral situation since the
contacts did not give rise to the suit.

It is possible that there are minimum contacts, but no specific


jurisdiction, because the contacts had no nexis. This would be a car
company that sells GPS in a state being sued for a tire problem – there
are minimum contacts since they availed themselves to the state’s gps
market, but no nexis because if the gps contacts were not there, the
suit would still happen. So you could not sue the company.

Always check minimum first so you can do this hypothetical in your


mind.

a. If yes, then go below and see the fair play factors jurisdiction
question. International Insurance Co. YES
b. If no, then no specific jurisdiction.
Would it be against fair play to exercise personal jurisdiction against person
or entity?
a. Review the reasonableness factors “gut check” – burden on
plaintiff, state interest, plaintiff’s interest, interstate interest…
foreign concerns (Asahi emphasizes this)…

LIST OF CASES:

ZIPPO
SHOE
Volkswagon
Joe’s knives
LL Bean
Burger King
Helicopteros
Prudential
McGee
Pavlovich
Asahi Tires

You might also like