Law Commons^™

Running On Empty: Ford V. Montana And The Folly Of Minimum Contacts, James P. George

Faculty Scholarship

Jurisdictional contests are in disarray. Criticisms date back to the issuance of International Shoe Co. v. Washington but the breakdown may be best illustrated in two recent Supreme Court opinions, the first rejecting California’s “sliding scale” that mixes general and specific contacts, the second using the discredited sliding scale to hold Ford amenable in states where accidents occurred.

California’s sliding scale is one variety of the contacts-relatedness tests, used in lower courts to have general contacts bolster weaker specific contacts. Some states—Montana and Minnesota for example—use the opposite extreme requiring a causal connection in defendant’s forum contacts, often using foreseeability …

Machine Learning And The New Civil Procedure, Zoe Niesel

Faculty Articles

There is an increasing emphasis in the legal academy, the media, and the popular consciousness on how artificial intelligence and machine learning will change the foundations of legal practice. In concert with these discussions, a critical question needs to be explored-As computer programming learns to adjust itself without explicit human involvement, does machine learning impact the procedural practice of law? Civil procedure, while sensitive to technology, has been slow to adapt to change. As such, this Article will explore the impact that machine learning will have on procedural jurisprudence in two significant areas-service of process and personal jurisdiction.

The Article …

Personal Jurisdiction: The Transnational Difference, Austen L. Parrish

Articles by Maurer Faculty

This Article engages with some of the key debates that have emerged among international Iaw and civil procedure scholars by examining the flurry of recent transnational cases that have become a common feature on the U.S. Supreme Court's docket. It makes three principal contributions. First, it explains how the recent decisions involving persona jurisdiction should be understood within, and partly limited to, their international contexts. Disputes in involving non-resident foreign defendants raise different considerations than those involving defendants in the United States, and this Article canvasses those differences. If a concern previously was that courts gave too short shrift to …

#Personaljurisdiction: A New Age Of Internet Contacts, Zoe Niesel

Faculty Articles

No abstract provided.

The Supreme Court's New Approach To Personal Jurisdiction, Bernadette Bollas Genetin

Akron Law Faculty Publications

In the Supreme Court’s recent general jurisdiction cases, it narrowed general jurisdiction in accord with a “reasonableness” approach to jurisdiction that is consistent with International Shoe’s so-called “forward-looking” face. In the Court’s most recent specific jurisdiction case, Walden v. Fiore, the Court took steps toward assessing specific jurisdiction under a reasonableness analysis, but it ultimately reunited the antagonistic “reasonableness” and territorial power theories to impose artificial limits on specific jurisdiction. The newly narrowed general jurisdiction will not often be available as a “safety valve” to provide jurisdiction in some cases in which jurisdiction would be reasonable under the circumstances. This …

The Supreme Court's New Approach To Personal Jurisdiction, Bernadette Bollas Genetin

Con Law Center Articles and Publications

The Supreme Court has returned to the issue of whether a “reasonableness” analysis or an “interstate federalism” focus underlies personal jurisdiction doctrine. It has, thus, renewed the debate regarding whether the so-called “forward-looking” or “backward-looking” face of International Shoe should control.

This Article explores two 2014 cases in which the Court took strides toward implementing a liberty interest, or reasonableness, view of personal jurisdiction. In the first case, Daimler AG v. Bauman, the Court introduced a new, narrower approach to general jurisdiction. Under Bauman’s more constrained analysis, general jurisdiction will be available primarily in an individual’s domicile and …

Brief Of Thirty-Four Law Professors As Amici Curiae In Support Of Appellants: Altera Corp. V. Papst Licensing Gmbh, Christopher B. Seaman

Scholarly Articles

The amici curiae are law professors who teach and write on civil procedure and/or patent law and policy. As such, amici are interested in the effective functioning of the courts and the patent system in general. Amici believe that this Court’s rigid rule restricting personal jurisdiction in patent declaratory judgment actions both flouts Supreme Court precedent and frustrates the public policy of clearing invalid patents. Although amici hold different views on other aspects of modern patent law and policy, they are united in their professional opinion that this Court should overturn its inflexible jurisdictional rule.

Personal Jurisdiction And The "Interwebs", Alan M. Trammell, Derek E. Bambauer

Scholarly Articles

For nearly twenty years, lower courts and scholars have struggled to figure out how personal jurisdiction doctrine should apply in the Internet age. When does virtual conduct make someone amenable to jurisdiction in any particular forum? The classic but largely discredited response by courts has been to give primary consideration to a commercial Web site’s interactivity. That approach distorts the current doctrine and is divorced from coherent jurisdictional principles. Moreover, scholars have not yielded satisfying answers. They typically have argued either that the Internet is thoroughly exceptional and requires its own rules, or that it is largely unexceptional and can …

A Tale Of Two Jurisdictions, Alan M. Trammell

Scholarly Articles

The Supreme Court has recently clarified one corner of personal jurisdiction—a court’s power to hale a defendant into court—and pointed the way toward a coherent theory of the rest of the doctrine. For nearly seventy years, the Court has embraced two theories of when jurisdiction over a defendant is permissible. The traditional theory, general jurisdiction, authorizes jurisdiction when there is a tight connection between the defendant and the forum. The modern theory, specific jurisdiction, focuses more on the connection between the lawsuit itself and the forum. Although the two theories should have developed in tandem, the doctrine has become a …

The Viability Of Enterprise Jurisdiction: A Case Study Of The Big Four Accounting Firms, Hannah L. Buxbaum

Articles by Maurer Faculty

One of the boundaries that U.S. courts must observe as they adjudicate regulatory disputes is the limit on their own jurisdictional authority -authority that is measured at the level of the particular forum state. Confronting the expansion of U.S. business activity from the local to the national scale during the second half of the twentieth century, courts consciously broadened jurisdictional standards to address the expanded activities of nationwide corporate groups. Today, by contrast, as the economy continues to expand from the national to the transnational scale, the U.S. Supreme Court has begun a retrenchment. In cases decided during the past …

Resoling International Shoe, Donald L. Doernberg

Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications

Goodyear Dunlop Tire Operations, S.A. v. Brown and Daimler AG v. Bauman sharply restricted general jurisdiction over corporations, limiting it to a corporation’s (1) state of incorporation, (2) state of principal place of business, or (3) another state where the corporation is “essentially at home.” The Court analogized the first two categories to an individual’s domicile. The Court made clear that the third category is very small, leading Justice Sotomayor, in her opinion concurring in the judgment, to charge that the Court had made many corporations “too big for general jurisdiction.” It is noteworthy that although the Court used the …

(Still) A "Real And Substantial" Mess: The Law Of Jurisdiction In Canada, Tanya Monestier

Law Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Jurisdiction's Noble Lie, Frederic M. Bloom

Publications

This Article makes sense of a lie. It shows how legal jurisdiction depends on a falsehood--and then explains why it would.

To make this novel argument, this Article starts where jurisdiction does. It recounts jurisdiction's foundations--its tests and motives, its histories and rules. It then seeks out jurisdictional reality, critically examining a side of jurisdiction we too often overlook. Legal jurisdiction may portray itself as fixed and unyielding, as natural as the force of gravity, and as stable as the firmest ground. But jurisdiction is in fact something different. It is a malleable legal invention that bears a false rigid …

Aggregation And Choice Of Law, Edward H. Cooper

Articles

This is more a conversational gambit than an article. I address a question at the intersection of procedure and choice of law, speaking as a proceduralist rather than a choice-of-law scholar. The question - which may be two questions - addresses the potential interdependence of procedural aggregation devices and choice of law. One part of the question is whether aggregation can justifiably change the choice of law made for some part of an aggregated proceeding. The other part is whether choice-of-law principles can be adapted to facilitate procedurally desirable aggregation. Answers may be sought either in abstract theory or in …

Jurisdiction And The Internet: Returning To Traditional Principles To Analyze Network-Mediated Contacts, A. Benjamin Spencer

Scholarly Articles

Courts have been evaluating the issue of personal jurisdiction based on Internet or "network-mediated" contacts for some time. The U.S. Supreme Court has remained silent on this issue, permitting the federal appeals courts to develop standards for determining when personal jurisdiction based on network-mediated contacts is appropriate. Unfortunately, the circuit approaches - which emphasize a website's "interactivity" and "target audience" - are flawed because they are premised on an outdated view of Internet activity as uncontrollably ubiquitous. This view has led courts to depart from traditional jurisdictional analysis and impose elevated and misguided jurisdictional standards. This Article argues that courts …

Jurisdiction And The Internet: Returning To Traditional Principles To Analyze Network-Mediated Contacts, A. Benjamin Spencer

Faculty Publications

Courts have been evaluating the issue of personal jurisdiction based on Internet or "network-mediated" contacts for some time. The U.S. Supreme Court has remained silent on this issue, permitting the federal appeals courts to develop standards for determining when personal jurisdiction based on network-mediated contacts is appropriate. Unfortunately, the circuit approaches-which emphasize a Web site's "interactivity" and "target audience" -are flawed because they are premised on an outdated view of Internet activity as uncontrollably ubiquitous. This view has led courts to depart from traditional jurisdictional analysis and impose elevated and misguided jurisdictional standards. This article argues that courts should reinstitute …

Sovereignty, Not Due Process: Personal Jurisdiction Over Nonresident, Alien Defendants, Austen L. Parrish

Articles by Maurer Faculty

The Due Process Clause with its focus on a defendant's liberty interest has become the key, if not only, limitation on a court's exercise of personal jurisdiction. This due process jurisdictional limitation is universally assumed to apply with equal force to alien defendants as to domestic defendants. With few exceptions, scholars do not distinguish between the two. Neither do the courts. Countless cases assume that foreigners have all the rights of United States citizens to object to extraterritorial assertions of personal jurisdiction.

But is this assumption sound? This Article explores the uncritical assumption that the same due process considerations apply …

What The Shutts Opt-Out Right Is And What It Ought To Be, Brian Wolfman, Alan B. Morrison

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

This article discusses the ramifications of the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Phillips Petroleum Co. v. Shutts, 472 U.S. 797 (1985), regarding the right of an absent class member to opt out of a class action. The article addresses both the current prevailing understanding of Shutts, which is based on the personal jurisdiction strain of due process jurisprudence, and what the authors believe is a more useful understanding, based on the property rights strain of due process jurisprudence. As an addendum to the article, the authors propose a new civil procedure rule governing class actions that would implement …

Minimum Contacts, No Dog: Evaluating Personal Jurisdiction For Nonparty Discovery, Ryan W. Scott

Articles by Maurer Faculty

No abstract provided.

Second Circuit 2000-2001 Personal Jurisdiction Developments, Jay C. Carlisle

Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications

This Survey Article will review some of the district and circuit courts' significant decisions, and comment on future trends for application of the law of personal jurisdiction in the Second Circuit. The Article concludes with a recommendation that district court judges should not grant or deny personal jurisdiction defenses until at least limited jurisdictional discovery has been granted and is completed.

Contracting Access To The Courts: Myth Or Reality? Bane Or Boon?, Jeffrey W. Stempel

Scholarly Works

Many scholars of the dispute resolution system perceive a sea change in attitudes toward adjudication that took place in the mid-1970s. Among the events of the time included the Pound Conference, which put the Chief Justice of the United States and the national judicial establishment on record in favor of at least some refinement, if not restriction, on access to courts. In addition, Chief Justice Burger, the driving force behind the Pound Conference, also used his bully pulpit as Chief Justice of the Supreme Court to promote ADR, particularly court-annexed arbitration. The availability of judicial adjuncts such as court-annexed arbitration …

Comparativist Ruminations From The Bayou On Child Custody Jurisdiction: The Uccja, The Pkpa, And The Hague Convention On Child Abduction, Christopher L. Blakesley

Scholarly Works

Interstate and international jurisdictional problems are often vexing. They are worse in matters of child custody. In the past, jurisdiction to obtain custody or to modify a custody decree required only presence or domicile. The United States population is transient and custody decisions are subject to modification. The volatility of child custody disputes and the tendency of parents to move to different and separate jurisdictions traditionally caused and continue to cause difficult problems for children, parents, and the legal system. Before the promulgation of the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction Act (UCCJA) and the Parental Kidnapping Prevention Act (PKPA), it was …

Interstate Consolidation: A Comparison Of The Ali Project With The Uniform Transfer Of Litigation Act (American Law Institute Complex Litigation Project: A Symposium, In Memoriam Donald Theodore Trautman), Edward H. Cooper

Articles

The Uniform Transfer of Litigation Act (UTLA) was undertaken for purposes simpler than the mass consolidation of multiparty, multiforum litigation. It seeks to create an effective tool that can be used to reduce some of the artificial barriers that tradition has erected around the sovereign separateness of the many different court systems in this country. The fact of separate sovereignty must be recognized, however, and to this end consent of both transferring and receiving courts is required. Within the consent requirement, transfer from the court system of one sovereign to the court system of another can improve on present practices …

Personal Jurisdiction And The Beetle In The Box, Wendy Collins Perdue

Law Faculty Publications

In 1980 in World-Wide Volkswagen v. Woodson, the Supreme Court described personal jurisdiction as "an instrument of interstate federalism." Two years later in Insurance Corporation of Ireland v. Compagnie des Bauxites de Guinee, the Court back-pedaled and explained that personal jurisdiction "represents a restriction on judicial power not as a matter of sovereignty, but as a matter of individual liberty." Then, in 1985 in Phillips Petroleum v. Shutts, the Court explained that the purpose of personal jurisdiction is "to protect a defendant from the travail of defending in a distant forum." Three years later in Van Cauwenberghe v. Biard, …

Personal Jurisdiction After Asahi: The Other (International) Shoe Drops, R. Lawrence Dessem

Faculty Publications

This articles analyzes the growth and development of the doctrine of personal jurisdiction and the Supreme Court's consideration and application of that doctrine in the recent case of Asahi Metal Industry Co. v. Superior Court. Asahi is significant both because of the nature of the suit and the nationality of the third-party defendant. The Supreme Court for the first time directly addressed the constitutionality of the ‘stream of commerce’ doctrine of personal jurisdiction, a jurisdictional theory that has been employed increasingly in recent years in products liability actions. Asahi also is one of the few cases in which the Court …

Sin, Scandal And Substantive Due Process: Personal Jurisdiction And Pennoyer Reconsidered, Wendy Collins Perdue

Law Faculty Publications

Professor Perdue recounts the underlying story of the U.S. Supreme Court's seminal personal jurisdiction case, Pennoyer v. Neff.

Personal Jurisdiction And The Stream Of Commerce, A. Kimberley Dayton

Faculty Scholarship

This article evaluates the stream of commerce theory of personaljurisdiction in light of existing precedent and the constitutionalimperative of due process. Part II briefly describes the factualbackground of Asahi and the various opinions rendered in the case.Part m outlines the development of jurisdictional doctrine since International Shoe, emphasizing the meaning of "purposeful availment" and its fluid role in the due process equation governing statecourt jurisdiction. Part IV then traces the evolution of the stream of commerce theory since International Shoe. Part V examines and rejects criticisms of the stream of commerce theory, and concludes that under any reasonabre interpretation of …

Child Custody - Jurisdiction And Procedure, Christopher L. Blakesley

Scholarly Works

Custody determinations traditionally have comprised a subcategory of litigation under the Pennoyer v. Neff exception for proceedings relating to status. Of course, states have the power to decide the status of their domiciliaries. It was natural, therefore, for the courts and scholars of the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries to consider domicile the sole basis of jurisdiction in custody matters. Gradually, judges and scholars began to challenge the notion that domicile was the sole basis and courts began to apply other bases, such as the child's presence in the state or personal jurisdiction over both parents. One commentator suggests that …

Power, Convenience, And The Elimination Of Personal Jurisdiction In The Federal Courts, Robert Haskell Abrams

Journal Publications

After briefly cataloging the types of federal court cases that raise difficult conceptual issues regarding personal jurisdiction, this article will explore in detail the possible function and content of a uniquely federal concept of personal jurisdiction.

After rejecting functions based on constitutional concern for litigant convenience" and federalism of the Erie R.R. v. Tompkins vein, other roles for the concept will be considered. This exploration will be expanded to consider the functions presently served by limitations on service of process and federal venue and the ability of those doctrines to subsume all useful aspects of the personal jurisdiction inquiry. A …

The Modern Utility Of Quasi In Rem Jurisdiction, Paul D. Carrington

Articles by Maurer Faculty

Professor Carrington examines the proposed amendment to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure that would confer quasi in rem jurisdiction on the federal courts and concludes that it should be rejected. Arguing that the expansion of the concept of personal jurisdiction has removed most of what justification there once was for quasi in rem jurisdiction, the author maintains that the latter jurisdiction often provides only limited and uncertain judgments for local plaintiffs while compelling nonresident defendants to litigate in an inconvenient forum, and herefore should not be made available in the federal courts merely to bring their practice into conformity …