I.
Personal Jurisdiction a. Minimum Contacts Test (individuals and corporations) i. General Jurisdiction – only when contacts with state are so substantial he would expect it and it wouldn’t inconvenience. 1. Presence – defendant served within the state’s limits. 2. Domicile or state of incorporation – ii. Specific Jurisdiction 1. Consent – may consent by contract before suit is brought, may waive service of process, or by not objecting to personal jurisdiction. iii. State directed Acts 1. Only to those personal claims arising out of those acts. As the level of state-directed activity increases, the state’s power extends to claims less related to that activity. 2. Defendant must purposefully avail himself (Must have made a deliberate choice to relate to the state) a. A seller has not purposefully availed himself to a state where a buyer unilaterally takes his product. b. The defendant’s conduct with the forum State are such that he should reasonably anticipate being haled into court there. 3. Stream of Commerce – the courts are split a. O’Connor says that mere awareness that the stream of commerce may sweep goods into the state after they leave the defendant’s hands doesn’t satisfy purposeful availment. D must seek to serve the market in a particular state, such as designing the product for the market in that state or advertising there. b. Sending goods into a stream of commerce, at least in substantial quantities, constitutes purposeful availment, whether the maker knows that the goods will be sold in a state or cultivates customers there. b. Fair Play and Substantial Justice (When deliberate contacts exist other factors will be weighed in determining whether the exercise of jurisdiction would comport with “fair play and substantial justice”) i. Interest in the forum state in providing redress to its citizens ii. Interest of the plaintiff in obtaining relief in a convenient forum iii. Interest of the states in enforcing their substantive law or policy iv. The extent of the inconvenience to the defendant if he is forced to defend away from home. c. In Rem and Quasi-in-Rem Jurisdiction i. Used to allow a plaintiff to acquire jurisdiction over the defendant wherever the defendant had property in the forum simply by attaching it. ii. After Schaffer, property can be attached buy only for security.
iii. Jurisdiction cannot be founded on property within a state unless there are sufficient contacts within the meaning of the test developed in International Shoe.