CIVIL PROCEDURE
1) Personal Jurisdiction (DPC)
Where a civil case is brought to the courts by a plaintiff in a particular forum state, the court must
have personal jurisdiction over the defendant or the property concerned. There are three types of
personal jurisdiction; In personam; In rem, and; Quasi in rem.
In personam jurisdiction refers to power over the defendant. This requires satisfaction of both; (1)
The forum state’s long-arm statute; and (2) The Due Process Clause of the US Constitution.
Regarding the latter, this specifically requires that the defendant have sufficient nexus with two
jurisdictions. 5th Amendment recognises personal jurisdiction through the Defendant’s contact
anywhere in the US, whereas 14th Amendment deals with the Defendant’s contact with the forum
state. The latter requires either general or specific jurisdiction. General jurisdiction requires that the
forum state is the domicile of the defendant. For individuals, his domicile is determined by the
defendant’s last present residence where he permanently chose to live. For corporations, its
domicile is determined by the place of incorporation or where its principal place of business is
based, such as its headquarters. Specific jurisdiction requires that the defendant have made
sufficient contact with the forum state. In a commercial context, the defendant must have
purposefully availed himself to the economic benefits of doing commerce in that forum state, and
that he could have foresaw that he would be ‘haled into court’ where he would face litigation for
any wrongdoing in that forum state. For example, the defendant intended to sell his products in that
forum and the plaintiff who purchased the product may intend to sue him for wrongfully serving
that product in that state, which the defendant should have reasonably foresaw at the time of sale. In
a litigation context, the defendant may have been voluntarily served in the state and was physically
present because he was served with process. This excludes the defendant testifying in the state, as
this does not necessarily mean he was being served with process, thus he had no sufficient contact
with the state. In terms of internet, the defendant may have established a passive website, in which
he targeted specific readers in that forum state which would establish specific jurisdiction.
Otherwise, an active website would establish general jurisdiction where he simply uploaded a
website from his headquarters in that state. However, specific jurisdiction must also be fair and not
offend the traditional notions of justice. This may be determined by the location of the witnesses or
the defendant, in which the state should not be too far geographically from their domiciles
otherwise it would be too inconvenient for them to attend the courts in that forum state. Also, the
public policies of that forum state should not be too harsh on the defendant based on their
circumstances. The state should also provide enough redress/compensation to the plaintiff.
In rem jurisdiction refers to power over the defendant’s property.
Quasi-in rem jurisdiction requires that the forum state does not have in personam jurisdiction over
the defendant. However, the forum state has in rem jurisdiction over the defendant’s property
(which is located in the forum state). Thus the forum state can use its in rem jurisdiction to
indirectly force the defendant to attend its court by attaching his property to prevent him from
losing title over his property. This requires the following. First, the plaintiff must have exercised
reasonable efforts to serve process to create in personam jurisdiction. Second, the defendant’s
property must have value. Third, the defendant must have ownership and control over the property.
Fourth, the defendant’s property must be located in the forum state. Fifth, the forum state must
provide notice to the defendant and an opportunity to be heard, under Procedural Due Process.
1) Personal Jurisdiction (DPC)
Where a civil case is brought to the courts by a plaintiff in a particular forum state, the court must
have personal jurisdiction over the defendant or the property concerned. There are three types of
personal jurisdiction; In personam; In rem, and; Quasi in rem.
In personam jurisdiction refers to power over the defendant. This requires satisfaction of both; (1)
The forum state’s long-arm statute; and (2) The Due Process Clause of the US Constitution.
Regarding the latter, this specifically requires that the defendant have sufficient nexus with two
jurisdictions. 5th Amendment recognises personal jurisdiction through the Defendant’s contact
anywhere in the US, whereas 14th Amendment deals with the Defendant’s contact with the forum
state. The latter requires either general or specific jurisdiction. General jurisdiction requires that the
forum state is the domicile of the defendant. For individuals, his domicile is determined by the
defendant’s last present residence where he permanently chose to live. For corporations, its
domicile is determined by the place of incorporation or where its principal place of business is
based, such as its headquarters. Specific jurisdiction requires that the defendant have made
sufficient contact with the forum state. In a commercial context, the defendant must have
purposefully availed himself to the economic benefits of doing commerce in that forum state, and
that he could have foresaw that he would be ‘haled into court’ where he would face litigation for
any wrongdoing in that forum state. For example, the defendant intended to sell his products in that
forum and the plaintiff who purchased the product may intend to sue him for wrongfully serving
that product in that state, which the defendant should have reasonably foresaw at the time of sale. In
a litigation context, the defendant may have been voluntarily served in the state and was physically
present because he was served with process. This excludes the defendant testifying in the state, as
this does not necessarily mean he was being served with process, thus he had no sufficient contact
with the state. In terms of internet, the defendant may have established a passive website, in which
he targeted specific readers in that forum state which would establish specific jurisdiction.
Otherwise, an active website would establish general jurisdiction where he simply uploaded a
website from his headquarters in that state. However, specific jurisdiction must also be fair and not
offend the traditional notions of justice. This may be determined by the location of the witnesses or
the defendant, in which the state should not be too far geographically from their domiciles
otherwise it would be too inconvenient for them to attend the courts in that forum state. Also, the
public policies of that forum state should not be too harsh on the defendant based on their
circumstances. The state should also provide enough redress/compensation to the plaintiff.
In rem jurisdiction refers to power over the defendant’s property.
Quasi-in rem jurisdiction requires that the forum state does not have in personam jurisdiction over
the defendant. However, the forum state has in rem jurisdiction over the defendant’s property
(which is located in the forum state). Thus the forum state can use its in rem jurisdiction to
indirectly force the defendant to attend its court by attaching his property to prevent him from
losing title over his property. This requires the following. First, the plaintiff must have exercised
reasonable efforts to serve process to create in personam jurisdiction. Second, the defendant’s
property must have value. Third, the defendant must have ownership and control over the property.
Fourth, the defendant’s property must be located in the forum state. Fifth, the forum state must
provide notice to the defendant and an opportunity to be heard, under Procedural Due Process.
