PERSONAL JURISDICTION
Is Δ a resident of forum state?
• Individuals: State of Residence
• Corporations: State of incorporation
and principal place of business
Was Δ served with process in state?
• Tag Jurisdiction: Upheld in Burnham
Does Δ consent to PJ? (appearance)
General Jurisdiction over Δ?
• Are Δ’s contacts with state
systematic or pervasive?
• Helicopteros sets standard; the
following were not sufficient:
◦ Purchase of entire copter fleet in TX
◦ Copters retrieved, flown back from TX
◦ CEO initiated negotiations in TX
◦ $4 million in business over 7 yrs. in TX
◦ Employees continuously in TX for 7 yrs.
◦ Pilots trained in TX over 7 yrs.
• Note: Majority rejects each
factor individually, but never
considers the sum. Fork?
• Clearly a very high bar to meet
Fairness Factors satisfied?
◦ Interests, burdens of the parties
◦ Chosen forum’s interest
◦ Interest of other forums
◦ Interest of judicial system
◦ Applicable state law
Look to Burger King, Asahi Metal
Π has Personal
Jurisdiction over Δ
Does Δ own property in state?
Does property relate to suit?
• Requirement in Shaffer v. Heitner
• Fork: Majority suggests this is
required for real estate as well.
Concurrences disagree
Does state’s Long Arm Statute cover Δ?
• Rule 4(k)(1)(A) references/incorporates state law
• Statute may be interpreted broadly, as in
Gray v. American Radiator
Specific Jurisdiction over Δ?
• Minimum Contacts: Did Δ’s contacts with
state give rise to Π’s harm
• Purposeful Availment: Did Δ take
deliberate action towards state?
• World Wide Volkswagen: Being subject
to suit must be foreseeable. Unilateral act
of Π not sufficient.
• Burger King: Signing long-term contract
of affiliation with party in state sufficient
for minimum contacts there
Fork: Stream of Commerce
If Δ puts products into stream of commerce,
is he purposely availing himself to whichever
state the products end up? Asahi Metal
does not resolve this.
• O’Connor view: Not enough, Δ must
clearly seek market there.
• Brennan view: Good enough, Δ benefits
from sales in other states regardless of how
products get there
No Personal Jurisdiction unless Δ waives objection
• Δ may make a 12(b)(2) motion