CALIFORNIA CIVIL LITIGATION PERSONAL JURISDICTION 2005 by Thomson

CALIFORNIA CIVIL LITIGATION PERSONAL JURISDICTION © 2005 by Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. 1

The authority of a court extends to the border of the state in which it is located. 2

PERSONAL JURISDICTION— power of the court to render an enforceable judgment over the person or property involved in the dispute. 3

LACK OF PERSONAL JURISDICTION Violation of constitutional due process Court exceeds authority over the person Judgment is void 4

TYPES OF PERSONAL JURISDICTION ¨ In personam ¨ In rem ¨ Quasi in rem 5

IN PERSONAM— jurisdiction of the court over a particular person, arising out of presence in the state, consent, or “minimum contacts” with the state. 6

IN REM— jurisdiction of a court over property in dispute, arising because the property is located within the state. 7

QUASI IN REM— jurisdiction of the court over an out-ofstate defendant’s property located in the state. 8

OBTAINING IN PERSONAM JURISDICTION 1. Consent 2. Service on the in-state defendant 3. “Minimum contacts” with the out-of- state defendant 9

CONSENT May be given: a. by deliberate appearance. b. by mistaken appearance. c. by contract. 10

IN-STATE DEFENDANT— service of summons while defendant is in the state. a. Provides notice of the action, and b. satisfies due process. 11

OUT-OF-STATE DEFENDANT— service of summons is notice only. Defendant must have “minimum contacts” with the state for summons to be effective. 12

THE LONG ARM OF THE LAW For the court to reach beyond the border of the forum state to an out-of-state defendant, the Constitution requires that the defendant have “minimum contacts” with the state. 13

MINIMUM CONTACTS— the out-of-state defendant’s contacts with the forum state that makes it fair to assert the court’s authority over him. 14

EXAMPLES OF MINIMUM CONTACTS 1. Traveling into the state. 2. Sending products into the state. 3. Maintaining a branch office in the state. 15

GENERAL JURISDICTION— the contacts with the forum state are so pervasive that the out-of-state defendant can be sued for an act unrelated to the contacts. 16

LIMITED JURISDICTION— contact is so limited that fairness requires that the out-of-state defendant can only be sued in the forum state for acts arising out of that contact. 17

CHALLENGING PERSONAL JURISDICTION The out-of-state defendant may: 1. specially appear to challenge jurisdiction; and/or 2. ignore the action and argue against enforcement of any judgment against him in his own state. 18

CHOICE OF COURT LOCATION ¨ Forum non conveniens ¨ Venue 19

FORUM NON CONVENIENS— transferring to a court in another state with jurisdiction for the convenience of the parties. 20

VENUE— transferring to another court in the state for the parties’ convenience. 21

DETERMINING VENUE ¨ Transitory action: could have occurred anywhere, so venue usually proper where defendant is located. ¨ Local action: involves real property or community, so venue proper only where located. 22

SUMMARY Defining, Analyzing, and Asserting Personal Jurisdiction PREVIEW Introduction to Pleadings 23