Jurisdiction Commons^™

State Of Nevada V. Rocky Stanley Salazar, 123 Nev. Adv. Op. 45 (May 28, 2026), Bowen Fuller

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

When second-degree murder by a controlled substance starts on tribal land but consummates on nontribal land, the state has jurisdiction to prosecute the crime.

Open And Shut: Non-Removal Statutesand Door-Closing Penalties, Isaac Zwerling

Pepperdine Law Review

There is a longstanding tension in the Court’s treatment of non-removal statutes and door-closing penalties. On the one hand, the Court has held non-removal statutes—business registration statutes that condition a foreign corporation’s license on that corporation’s right to remove cases brought against it to federal court—pose an unconstitutional limit on federal court access. On the other, the Court has extended door-closing penalties statutes prohibiting unregistered foreign corporations from initiating an action in the forum state—to federal courts sitting in diversity. This Article surveys how the Court arrived at this puzzling result. It does so by analyzing each line of cases …

الدفع بعدم الإختصاص في قانون الإجراءات المدنية الإماراتي, أحمد حجال

Proche-Orient, Études juridiques

This study addresses the procedural regime of the objection to jurisdiction, which is one of the procedural defenses that raise in the UAE law the issue of the applicable procedural rules. Before which courts and at what stage of the litigation this defense can be raised, and who is the party entitled to raise it? May or should the court raise it proprio motu? Did the Emirati law adopt the traditional categorization of objections to jurisdiction, that is founded on the jurisdiction rules as such? The rules of absolute jurisdiction are the ones whose violation results in a lack …

Leeds V. Norfolk Southern Railway Company—In Undoing Late Removal, District Court Gives Guidance On Evaluating Whether Defendants Were Joined In “Bad Faith”, Geoffrey D. Kearney

SLU Law Journal Online

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1446, defendants typically have one year to remove to federal court a case filed in state court. The landscape for removal changed somewhat with a 2011 amendment to this statute, which extends that one-year deadline upon a showing “that the plaintiff has acted in bad faith in order to prevent a defendant from removing the action.”

But the question of what sort of conduct satisfies this provision persists. Since its passage, courts—primarily district courts—have grappled with just what it means for a plaintiff to act in bad faith to thwart removal. Leeds v. Norfolk Southern …

Asarco Delenda Est, John Greabe

West Virginia Law Review

ASARCO Inc. v. Kadish is the most important Supreme Court decision addressing the adjudication in state courts of federal claims that Article III’s case-or-controversy requirements would bar lower federal courts from hearing. But there are two serious problems with the reasoning of ASARCO: one involving an error of omission and the other an error of commission. ASARCO’s error of omission is its apparent assumption that a party barred from asserting a federal claim in federal court because of a lack of redressable Article III injury caused by the conduct complained of should face no barriers to obtaining relief on the …

Section 302(A)'S "Arising From" Nexus Element: Need For A Tune-Up In The Aftermath Of Ford Motor?, Michael J. Hutter

Pace Law Review

This article traces the historical development of the “arising out of” and “relate to” nexus requirements, examines the evolution of state long- arm statutes following International Shoe Co., and analyzes the origins and judicial interpretation of C.P.L.R. § 302(a). It argues that New York’s statutory scheme no longer fully reflects the constitutional scope of specific jurisdiction as articulated by the Supreme Court. The article concludes by proposing a legislative amendment to C.P.L.R. 302(a) to add the phrase “relate to,” thereby aligning New York’s long-arm statute with Due Process and better effectuating the statute’s underlying purpose of affording New York residents …

How To Apply Hertz Corp. V. Friend In The Age Of Remote Work, John Andrikos

Catholic University Journal of Law and Technology

The widespread adoption of remote work in the United States has strained the workability of the nerve center test of Hertz Corp. v. Friend. This comment analyzes how federal courts have applied the nerve center test to fact patterns involving partially or fully remote corporations. Further, it proposes a novel solution to this jurisdictional problem: the Key Person Test.

Chimeric Contacts And Consent: The Ill-Reasoned Expansion Of Corporate Jurisdictional Exposure, James P. George

William & Mary Business Law Review

Two recent Supreme Court decisions have imposed aspects of general jurisdiction in a way that exposes corporations and possibly other legal actors to litigation in spuriously connected forums. One case—Ford Motor Company v. Montana—reached a fair result but with strained reasoning that will support unfair results. The second case—Mallory v. Norfolk Southern Railroad Company—was wrong on the facts and the law, imposing general jurisdiction based on a vaguely worded corporate registration statute validated by a more than century-old precedent based on Pennoyer v. Neff’s limited territorial model.

Both decisions were the result of conceptual corners …

Keeping Cruises At Bay: Whether Port Cities Violate The Dormant Commerce Clause And Federal Maritime Law, Julie Jacobs

Chicago-Kent Law Review

No abstract provided.

Environmental Jurisdiction In The Congress And The Executive, Edmund S. Muskie

Maine Law Review

Extraterrestrial exploration and a historic lunar success have helped give modern man a unique perspective on the earth and his natural environment. We have looked on our planet from the reaches of outer space and have seen how small, how alone, and how vulnerable we are. We have travelled to the moon and photographed Mars, but we have finally realized that no matter how far or how fast we grow, no matter how far afield our explorations take us, and no matter how great our vision, we must always return to earth. This is a discomfiting realization for a civilization …

Vagueness And The Vermont Long-Arm Statute, Maine Law Review

Maine Law Review

The authority of state courts to assert jurisdiction over the person of nonresidents has expanded markedly since the days of Pennoyer v. Neff. Different theories for asserting jurisdiction over individuals, as opposed to corporations, have been discarded. For jurisdictional purposes, the common law classifications of in personam, in rem and quasi in rem have been abandoned. "Minimum contacts" has become the all-embracing rationale for reviewing any assertion of jurisdiction over a nonresident defendant by a state court. But if "minimum contacts" has replaced these former concepts and served to simplify and unify the requirements of due process, it has also …

Preclusive Jurisdictional Dismissals, Kevin Song

Northwestern University Law Review

Every litigant deserves their day in court. At the same time, litigants cannot endlessly go to court on the same matter. A complex body of preclusion law balances these fundamental tenets by examining when adjudication of a matter precludes subsequent relitigation. This body of law has evolved over time to preserve the day-in-court ideal in a way that is sensitive to the threats that relitigation present to judicial efficiency, fair adjudication, and repose. Modern preclusion law has settled on a pragmatic approach: where a court has issued a final judgment on the merits but erroneously assumed jurisdiction, relitigation may still …

"Jurisdictional" Indictments, Informations And Complaints: An Unnecessary Doctrine, Peter G. Ballou

Maine Law Review

In the majority of jurisdictions in the United States, including the federal courts and Maine, a sufficient indictment, information or complaint is deemed an absolute prerequisite to a valid conviction. This right to a sufficient charging instrument is not subject to waiver and may be asserted at any time, even though not raised before or during trial or on direct appeal from a conviction. This characteristic of nonwaivability, probably unique among the rights belonging to a criminal defendant, has led some courts, including the Maine Supreme Judicial Court, to characterize the requirement of a sufficient indictment as "jurisdictional." When an …

The Use Of Federal Habeas Corpus In Child Custody Disputes, Maine Law Review

Maine Law Review

Inability to enforce child custody decrees on a nationwide basis has created an unfortunate and well-publicized anomaly in the law. A parent disappointed with one state's award of custody may remove the child to another jurisdiction, gambling that the second state's courts will decline to enforce the original decree. Of the several remedies that have been suggested to relieve this situation, federal habeas corpus remains among the least explored. The use of federal habeas corpus in child custody disputes raises two questions central to every federal jurisdictional controversy: Do the federal courts have power to entertain the action? If the …

The Role Of Foreseeability In Jurisdictional Inquiry: Tyson V. Whittaker & Son, Inc., Philip M. Coffin Iii

Maine Law Review

When defining the extent of their jurisdiction over nonresident defendants, state courts must be ever mindful of the principle that "all assertions of state-court jurisdiction must be evaluated according to the standards set forth in International Shoe and its progeny. In deciding jurisdictional issues against this background of Supreme Court decisions, many courts have had considerable difficulty in ascertaining the precise extent of the amorphous and discretionary standards set forth in International Shoe and subsequent cases. In the recent decision of Tyson v. Whitaker & Son, Inc., the Maine Supreme Judicial Court was put to this task in deciding whether …

Calling On Congress: Use The Spending Clause To Keep Juveniles In Juvenile Court, Erin Fitzgerald

Pepperdine Law Review

Recently, juvenile justice reformers have had great success in expanding the reach of the juvenile court. Over the last two decades, many states have raised their age of majority, bringing older teens and young adults under the jurisdictional umbrella of the juvenile court. Likewise, many states have amended their transfer statutes, making transferring juveniles from juvenile court to adult criminal court more difficult. The success of these reforms is largely due to the relentless work of dedicated juvenile justice advocates and scholars. The “raise-the-age” movement and work to limit juvenile transfers has undoubtedly helped to retain more youthful offenders within …

There’S No Place Like Essentially At Home: General Jurisdiction Over Individuals Apart From Domicile And Presence, Jeffrey L. Rensberger

Arkansas Law Review

In personal jurisdiction, an intellectual siloing has prevented some courts from using a basis of jurisdiction over individuals that is available for corporations. This Article explores this question. Jurisdiction in such a case turns on whether general jurisdiction based on a large number of unrelated contacts--contacts-based general jurisdiction--applies to individuals as well as to corporations. The short answer is that despite hesitancy in the cases, such jurisdiction has historically been invoked and this is a correct result as a matter of due process doctrine. One aim of this Article is to dispel the doubt on this point that unnecessarily persists. …

Why Did The Lawyer Cross The Road? The Aba's Proposal To Overhaul Model Rule 5.5 And Permit Cross-Border Practice, Paula Frederick

Akron Law Review

The American Bar Association (ABA) is considering a proposal to amend Model Rule 5.5, which would allow lawyers licensed in any U.S. jurisdiction to practice law across state lines under specific conditions. This "driver's license" model aims to address current regulatory barriers by permitting lawyers to provide legal services nationwide, provided they disclose their home jurisdiction, comply with local rules, and meet certain ethical standards. Motivated by the pandemic, technological changes, and the uniform bar exam, the proposal seeks to improve access to legal services, reduce regulatory burdens, and offer clients greater choice of counsel, though it faces potential challenges …

Remote Work's Complication Of Companies' Personal Jurisdiction Standings: Morphing The Historical Analysis To Fit Modern Remote Work Characteristics, Lindarose Piccolo

American University Business Law Review

Personal jurisdiction ensures that the proper forum adjudicates civil disputes to prevent burdening a defendant with litigating in inconvenient forums. International Shoe Co. v. Washington established that defendants must have minimum contacts with the forum state such that exercise of jurisdiction comports with fair play and substantial justice. Following International Shoe, many cases have provided examples of the minimum contacts that would establish personal jurisdiction.

However, the ability for employees to work remotely from their homes using technological devices and software has exponentially increased over the past five years. Because of the increased ability to work remotely from anywhere in …

Erie And Enforceability Of Forum Selection Clauses, Patrick Woolley

American University Law Review

Whether and to what extent state law governs the contractual validity of forum selection clauses in federal court remains highly contested. This Article argues for a two-part answer.

State law should govern whenever a party seeks a § 1404(a) transfer of venue within the federal judicial system. The Court has insisted that the choice-of-law rules of the state to which the suit is transferred govern when transfer is required by a contractually valid clause. That insistence accords with the Erie policy of vertical uniformity between state and federal courts only if the law of the state in which the transferring …

Is Federal Question Jurisdiction Arising Or Setting, Lumen N. Mulligan

Faculty Works

In this essay, I respond to Professor Arthur D. Hellman. Hellman argues that "there is reason to be concerned that the [federal] judicial system falls short of the Framers' expectations--primarily by denying many litigants in cases presenting federal questions 'their real day in an Article III court,' but also by fostering 'balkanization' rather than uniformity in the interpretation of federal law." It is a privilege to comment upon Hellman's thoughtful piece. In doing so, I begin by questioning the value of originalist interpretations of Article III jurisdiction both descriptively and normatively. I then turn to an intra-originalist critique that paints …

A Critical Juncture: The Convergence Of Natural Resource Management And Tribal Sovereignty, Anna Aleta Butterfield

Graduate Student Portfolios, Professional Papers, and Capstone Projects

This portfolio reflects the work I’ve done in my four years as a dual degree student, pursuing a Master of Science in Environmental Studies and a juris doctorate degree, and focuses on policies and laws surrounding natural resource management. It touches on how those policies relate to and expand or constrict the exercise of sovereignty by indigenous populations.

This piece first considers the effects of plastic on salmon populations and those indigenous groups that rely on salmon for subsistence and cultural purposes. The remaining three pieces focus on various aspects of the Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes - Montana Water …

Dissell V. Trans World Airlines: Constitutional Limitations On The Workers' Compensation Commission's Subject-Matter Jurisdiction, Patricia A. Nelson-Reade

Maine Law Review

To rule upon a workers' compensation claim, the Maine Workers' Compensation Commission must determine that it has both personal and subject-matter jurisdiction. Personal jurisdiction is determined by applying Maine's "long-arm" statute. Subject-matter jurisdiction derives from the Commission's status as an administrative agency authorized to administer the Maine Workers' Compensation Act (MWCA). Although subject-matter determination generally involves a choice-of-law issue, in a workers' compensation claim having extraterritorial aspects, the Commission is not free to apply the compensation acts of other states that have contacts with the claim. Rather, the Commission may determine only if it has authority under the MWCA to …

Rwu Law Alumni Newsletter December 2024, Roger Williams University School Of Law, Pbn Connect, Edward Fitzpatrick, Danna Lorch

RWU Law

No abstract provided.

Not "Indian" Enough: Freedmen, Jurisdiction, And Equal Protection, Ted Shepherd

Pepperdine Law Review

Beginning in the 17th century, many American Indians owned enslaved African workers. They stopped only at the end of the Civil War, when several Tribal Nations signed treaties with the federal government requiring them to emancipate their enslaved workers. The treaties also required the Nations to enroll these “Freedmen” and their descendants as full Tribal members. The Nations complied for a time, but then withdrew membership from the descendants in the 1970s. In 2017, however, a federal court required the Cherokee Nation to honor its treaty and grant the descendants of Cherokee Freedmen full Tribal membership, which it did. Despite …

Jurisdiction Of The Land Use Regulation Commission Within Baxter State Park, Benjamin P. Townsend

Maine Law Review

Baxter State Park is a 200,000 acre preserve located in north-central Maine that contains, among other natural features, Maine's highest mountain, Katahdin. The park was created through the efforts of a former Governor of Maine, Percival Proctor Baxter, who bought the land himself and then donated it to the people of the State of Maine. His Deeds of Gift, which were accepted by the Maine Legislature, created a trust, under the terms of which the Park is to remain "forever wild." The park is supervised by the three-member Baxter State Park Authority, which is composed of the Attorney General, the …

Power For The People: Recognizing The Constitutional Right To Vote For President, Charlie Martel

Cardozo Law Review

On January 6, 2021, a mob attacked the United States Capitol to overthrow the certification of the legitimately elected president and install the election loser, Donald Trump. Before this, there was another coup attempt. Trump and his team pressured state legislators and officials not to certify legitimately elected presidential electors, and to instead certify fake electors for Trump. This was based on the theory that the Constitution grants states “plenary power” to select presidential electors, even if this means cancelling citizen elections or rejecting their outcome. The coups failed—this time.

There should be no next time. The Supreme Court should …

Shareholder Primacy Versus Shareholder Accountability, William Wilson Bratton

Articles

When corporations inflict injuries in the course of business, shareholders wielding environmental, social, and governance ("ESG") principles can, and now sometimes do, intervene to correct the matter. In the emerging fact pattern, corporate social accountability expands out of its historic collectivized frame to become an internal subject matter-a corporate governance topic. As a result, shareholder accountability surfaces as a policy question for the first time. The Big Three index fund managers, BlackRock, Vanguard, and State Street, responded to the accountability question with ESG activism. In so doing, they defected against corporate legal theory's central tenet, shareholder primacy. Shareholder primacy builds …

State Sovereign Immunity After The Revolution, Ernest A. Young

Faculty Scholarship

The Supreme Court’s 1996 decision in Seminole Tribe v. Florida opened an era of dramatic expansion of states’ sovereign immunity from suits by private parties. Nationalist Justices vigorously contested that expansion, vowing that they would never accept Seminole Tribe’s legitimacy or accord it stare decisis effect. In 2020, however, the unanimous decision in Allen v. Cooper did accept Seminole Tribe’s vision of state immunity, apparently ending the Court’s longstanding and bitter division on this issue. This Article assesses Seminole Tribe as a revolution in legal doctrine that established a new paradigm of state immunity law, analogous to the scientific upheavals …

Introduction: Twail And The International Law Of Jurisdiction, Rohini Sen

National Law School of India Review

Introduction: TWAIL and the International Law of Jurisdiction.