1L Civ Pro Personal Jurisdiction

power of a court to enter a judgment against a specific defendant

• It is the duty of the party asserting a claim (usually the P) to demonstrate that the
• court has PJ

• RULE 12(b)(2)-Lack of personal jurisdiction. Defendant must raise challenge to
• personal jurisdiction within the initial response or it is waived. No other
• party other than D will/can raise motion (no sua sponte decision or P)

• Jurisdiction over a person based on the person’s obligations in the
• state. A person’s actions/personal
• obligations are at issue (IE: torts like speeding).

• I) Stems from
• the notion that a state has exclusive control over all people within its
• territory; usually accessed when person is physically present or is a citizen

• II) Corporations
• are a legal entity which can only act through its agents and agencies

• Jurisdiction over a D based on the D’s actual property within the state (but only up the the
• value of the property). Status of property is at issue (IE: challenging title
• to property like liens, AP)

• II) State can
• obtain in rem jurisdiction if the nonresident owns property within the state
• and that property is attached is of issue at the very outset of litigation; constructive notice sufficient if property is attached to suit

III)Tangible Property (land) or Intangible Property (bank accounts or debt)

• A person’s actions/personal obligations are at issue (action against the person—suit
• is unrelated to property) but they own property within the state that subject
• the D to PJ

I) Recovery is limited to the value of the property that is within the jurisdiction

a legislative grant that allows a state to extend and exercise jurisdiction over a non-resident defendant.

N.C.G.S. 1-75.4

• P.S. She Asked
• If God Promised Forgiveness Cuz That
• Is Really Material

• (1) Local Presence
• or Status—

• (a) Presence
• within state

(b) Domicile (individual or corp)

• (c) Substantial
• activity within the state

(2) Special Jurisdiction Statutes—another statute says PJ is proper

• (3) Local Act or
• Omission—tort occurred in the
• state

• (4) Local Injury;
• Foreign Act—tort occurred in the
• state, but caused a tort produced outside the state plus at the time of injury:
• (a) Solicitation
• or services in NC

• (b) Use or consumption
• of D’s products in NC (Grey)

• (c) Advertisements/Junk
• Mail

• (5) Local Services, Goods or
• Contracts—contracts where
• performance occurs in the state

• (a) Includes D
• ships goods/service to D in NC (w/ or w/o regard to where delivery ends)

• (i) Brennan’s
• approach to the stream of commerce

(6) Local Property—real, personal, or tangible property in the state

• (7) Deficiency Judgment on a Local Foreclosure
• or Resale—debt still owed in NC

• (8) Director or Officer of a Domestic Corporation—Corporation incorporated in NC-can bring in
• director/officer (even if director/officer outside state) *(does not include principal place)*

(9) Taxes—owe taxes in the state

• (10) Insurance or Insurers—insurance company
• insures in NC

• (11) Personal Representative—executor, legal representatives take NC domicile of decedent of any
• event based on 2-10

• (12) Marital Relationship—Couple marries in
• the state… PJ exist if a spouse remains in NC

• jurisdiction even when the D is not physically
• within the state when served.

• (a) Individual—domicile:
• residence and the intent to remain indefinitely.

(b) Corporation—

• (i) State of
• Incorporation

• voluntary physical presence comports with due process, regardless of D’s contacts with
• the forum state.

• (a) Transient (or “Tag”) Jurisdiction—if present and served in the forum state, then that alone
• is enough, no matter how fleeting the visit. Does not violate Due Process. Applies to individuals traveling through a state.

• (b) Ineffective
• when—

• (i) Present
• because of fraud or misrepresentation.

(ii) Present by force or duress

(iii)Present as a witness in a legal proceeding

• Jurisdiction
• based on voluntary physical presence comports with due process, regardless of D’s
• contacts with the forum state

• (a) If a party
• consents to jurisdiction, the Due Process requirement of fairness is satisfied.

• (b) A D consents to PJ either by expressly
• agreeing to submit to the court or by performing certain acts that constitute a
• waiver of objections to PJ or by failing to assert a defense of lack of
• jurisdiction.

• (i) Choice of Law Provision—specifies
• what law governs disputes but does not specifiy the state forum; —may
• indicate that a party purposefully availed himself of the benefits and protections of the forum state.

• (ii) Choice of Forum Provision—indicates
• location the lawsuit takes place

1. Negotiations

• 2. Contemplated
• future consequences of K

• 3. Terms of the
• K

4. Course of dealing

• GR: merely causing an effect within the forum
• state without purposeful availment will not support jurisdiction.

P's unilateral acts are not sufficient!!!!!!

3 Prong Effects Test

1. Committed an intentional tort

2. Expressly aimed at the forum state

• 3. Causing harm, the brunt of which is sufferend and which the D knows is likely to
• suffer

…in the forum state

• jurisdiction cannot offend traditional notions of
• fair play and substantial justice

(a) Burden on the D

• (i) Foreign v.
• local citizenship; judicial systems

• (ii) Availability
• of witnesses, evidence, costs, etc.

• (b) Interests
• of the forum state

• (i) Protecting
• its own citizens.

• (ii) Enforcing its
• own laws.

(c) P’s interest in obtaining relief

• (d) Interstate
• and international judicial efficiency (commodity)

(e) Shared interests of states to further social policies

RULE 4(k)(1)(a) – Pendent Jurisdiction: Federal Court Piggy-Backs on State Court

• I) Once a district court has personal jurisdiction over a D for one claim, the federal
• gov’t can "piggyback" onto that claim other claims over which it lacks independent personal jurisdiction, provided that all the claims arise
• from the same facts as the claim over which it has proper personal
• jurisdiction.

Interlocutory—appeal before the litigation is completed

II) NC-PJ is considered a SUBSTANTIAL RIGHT, therefore the D can file an interlocury appeal to challenge PJ

• III)Federal—D cannot file an interlocutory appeal to challenge PJ, D will have to wait until
• after initial judgment, then file appeal