Jurisdiction over the Person (State law must authorize jurisdiction and exercise must be const.)

1. Types of Personal Jurisdiction

1.1. In personum

1.1.1. Forum has personal jurisdiction over Defendant

1.1.1.1. personal obligations or debts

1.1.1.2. typically receives a money judgement

1.1.2. Power occurs in two ways:

1.1.2.1. Transient Jurisdiction

1.1.2.2. Consent to jurisdiction

1.1.2.2.1. Contract, statute or waiver occurred

1.1.2.2.2. Basically, defendant allows jurisdiction in the forum state

1.2. InRem

1.2.1. Forum has power to adjudicate rights of all persons to a particular item of property, defendant is not personally bound.

1.2.1.1. Property within the forum state

1.2.1.2. Judgment is against the property

1.3. Quasi in Rem

1.3.1. Using the property to gain the power over the owner

1.3.2. Cause of action is unrelated to the land, but is used to satisfy the judgement.

1.3.3. Two Types

1.3.3.1. Type I: court adjudicates rights of parties in property base on property being in forum; close connection between case and property provides minimum contacts

1.3.3.2. Type II: court attaches property to bring defendant into forum on unrelated claim; defendant must have minimum contacts with forum

2. Statutory Limitations on Personal Jurisdiction

2.1. Federal court must analyze personal jurisdiction as if it were a court of the state in which it is located

2.1.1. State law must authorize jurisdiction

2.1.2. Most jurisdictions, if not all authorize jurisdiction when

2.1.2.1. 1. Defendant present in the forum state and personally served with process therein;

2.1.2.2. 2. Defendant domiciled in forum state

2.1.2.3. 3. Defendant conducts systematic and continuous business in the state such that the defendant is "essentially at home" therein;

2.1.2.4. 4. Defendant consents to jurisdiction

2.1.2.5. 5. Defendant commits an act covered by the long arm statute.

3. Constitutional Limitations on Personal Jurisdiction

3.1. Traditional Rule: Physical Power

3.2. Modern Due Process Standard: Contact and Fairness

3.2.1. 1. Defendant must have such minimum contacts with the forum such that the exercise of personal jurisdiction over him is fair and reasonable

3.2.1.1. Consider whether the defendant purposefully availed himself of the benefits and protections of state law and whether he could have anticipated being brought into state court

3.2.2. 2. Notice is also required

3.2.2.1. Traditional methods of personal service satisfy notice requirements

3.2.2.2. Requirement that agent notify defendant

3.2.2.3. Requirement for cases that involve multiple or unknown parties

4. Personal Jurisdiction

4.1. Specific

4.1.1. Personal Jurisdiction

4.1.1.1. Constitutional Developments

4.1.1.1.1. International Shoe redefined to the Minimum contacts

4.1.1.1.2. McGee adds the purposeful availment Requirement

4.1.1.1.3. Shafer

4.1.1.2. To prove a corporation has the sufficient minimum contacts to be sued in the forum state, must show the defendant's contacts meet the qualifications for (1) the nexus of the contacts and lawsuit, (2) the defendant purposefully availed himself to jurisdiction (3) it is Reasonable to bring suit against the defendant

4.1.1.2.1. To have a sufficient nexus, there needs to be a connection between the contacts and the lawsuit and the nature and quality of the contact

4.1.1.2.2. To determine if a defendant has purposefully availed himself to jurisdiction, must show that the defendant conducted activities in the forum state such that it invokes the protection and benefit of the forum states laws

4.1.1.2.3. The reasonableness of suing the defendant is based on if imposing jurisdiction meets the notions of fair play and substantial justice.

5. Defined:

5.1. Courts power over the parties

5.1.1. Plaintiff automatically consents to be under the courts power, but the defendant must be shown to be under the court's PJ

5.1.2. 28 USC § 1738/Article 4 § 1

5.1.2.1. Full Faith and Credit- All states will recognize the judgments of other states

5.1.2.2. Federal district courts will recognize prior state judgements

5.2. Allows authority to bring to court, render and enforce judgement against

5.2.1. Occurs Generally or specifically.

5.2.1.1. General Jurisdiction is the Substantial contacts of the defendant in the forum state (Domiciled, PPB, Incorporated)

5.2.1.2. Specific- minimum contacts analysis required

5.3. Direct v. Collateral Attack

5.3.1. A lawsuit without judgment liked creates a direct attack

5.3.1.1. Appeal, motion to reconsider

5.3.1.2. Any action to reconsider a judgement

5.3.2. A collateral attack is one state challenging another states decision (against full faith and credit)

6. Traditional Analysis of PJ

6.1. Does the state's long arm statute permit PJ?

6.1.1. Yes

6.1.1.1. Valid general PJ

6.1.2. No

6.1.2.1. Does the traditional basis for jurisdiction apply? (is defendant domiciled, served in forum or consent)

6.1.2.1.1. Yes and No Minimum contacts Analysis