1. a. Identify the factors the court will consider in deciding our motion to dismiss based upon lack of personal jurisdiction over Sea Quest. b. For each factor, identify the facts in the file that support our position. c. For each factor, identify what additional facts we need and where we might find them (likely sources).
2. Draft affidavits to be signed by Jones and Swift to support our motion to dismiss for forum non conveniens. Info to support our position that trial in Columbia will be inconvenient to our client. Place additional info that we need in brackets in form of statement in affidavit. Reginald Jones is Sea Quest’s Cayman lawyer. Nancy O’Brien is STI’s Lawyer.
PERSONAL JURISDICTION Where was he served? -- Miami Why was he where he was served? STI is exclusive booker of Sea Quest live aboard. Sinatra v. National Enquirer To Exercise Specific Jurisdiction there is a 3 part test. 1. and 2. Purposeful availment through forum related activities. Significant advertising efforts in forum state Solicitation of business in the forum which results in business being conducted The injury being a result of forum related activities (defaming a CA resident with knowledge that he is resident of CA in an effort to promote business) Establishing channels of communication for providing regular advise to customers in the forum Creating, controlling, and actively using a reservation and advertising system that brings customers from the forum Significant percentage of clients from forum Defendant’s acts creating a tortuous effect in CA 3. Reasonableness
Extent of purposeful interjection – Deliberately avail itself of benefits of forum laws or markets Burden of Defendant – Continuing contacts between Defendant and forum based agent v. maintaining no physical presence or agent in forum Conflict with Soverignty of Defendant’s State – Litigation of alien defendant v. defendant from sister state. Degree of control exercised over the marketing efforts conducted in forum or day-to-day activities of connection doing business in forum. Forum State’s Interest in Adjudicating the Suit – Is plaintiff a resident of forum Efficient Judicial Resolution – Where are the witnesses and evidence Convenience and effectiveness of relief for plaintiff – Can plaintiff get relief in another forum Existence of alternative forum --
FORUM NON Local Trial Lawyers Fewer cases so docket moves quickly Judgments are for less money This is a small operation, spending time in the States will ruin the business Two boats, 16 divers per boat. Day trips our of Cayman Brac. One live boat. Goes out for 5 or 6 days. This is where Zwier got hurt. British common law is used on the island where there is no specific statute
Mercier v. Sheraton Three factors for Forum Non 1. Adequate Alternative forum; and Is defendant amenable to process in the other forum? Does alternative forum permit litigation of the subject matter? 2. Balance of convenience and judicial efficiency favors litigating the claim in the alternative forum? Private Interest o Relative ease of access to sources of proof o Availability of compulsory process for attendance of unwilling, and the cost of obtaining attendance of willing witnesses o Possibility of view of premises, if view would be appropriate o All other practical problems that make trial of a case easy, expeditious and inexpensive o Enforceability of judgment if one is obtained Public Interest Factors o Administrative difficulties flowing from court congestion o Local interest in having localized controversies decided at home
o The interest in having the trial of a diversity case in a forum that is at home with the law that must govern o Avoidance of unnecessary problems in conflict of laws, or application of foreign laws o Unfairness of burdening citizens in an unrelated forum with jury duty