IF you think additional facts would be useful, you can use them and explain why they would

be useful.
Ex. Denise is spending an “extended period of time with her parents”. What does “extend period of
time mean, and why was she there?” this would be relevant. (it would be nice to know just how long it
was because it goes to the permanence because it goes to show if this was where she was at this point
in time and therefor a likely place where she would receive notice) these other facts could be useful (are
allowed to do that on exam)

DON’T ALLOW ONE SUB-ISSUE TO PREVENT YOU FROM ANALYIZING ALL OF THE ISSUES!!!

Personal Jurisdiction

Policy – if arguments are close use policy. What the underlying rationales are.

1. Individual Fairness and convenience

a. Preventing burden on the defendant to protect due process
b. Convince and other aspects to the other party.
2. State sovereignty, so states did not step on each other’s toes

If a D was purposefully availing themselves of benefits of state, they should expect to be defend against
claims

Black letter law -

NEED A STATUTORY PROVISION OF SOME KIND

1. Statutory – need a statutory provision of some kind, need a long arm statute
a. First question is does the court have statutory authority over the D?
b. Does this meet long arm statute?
c. Consent? If there was prior consent then there is consent
d. Service, if the individual was served in the state that is a way to have satisfy statute
and constitution
e. is there a 4k exception?
a. nationwide long arm state
b. if you are in fed ct under fed claim and that claim has a nationwide long arm
statute or if you have a fed claim in fed ct against a D which no state has
jurisdiction
c. but 90% of the time there will be a state long arm
f. Interpret the (long arm) statute
a. May look like the CA one, where the long arm is the same as consti.
b. Or it could be like GA where someone committed a tortious act in the
state…
2. Constitutional
a. What does due process require?
i. International shoe – purposeful availment of benefits, fair play and
substantial justice
1. Two prong test
a. Min contacts with state (3 elements) – does D have min
contacts with state. HAVE TO DO FOR EACH CONTACT!!
i. 1. What is the nature of the contact (single isolated,
continuous substantial, continuous systematic, in
between)
ii. 2. What is the relationship between contact and the
claim (does it give rise to the claim, is it related to
the claim, or is it totally unrelated to claim)
iii. **Purposeful availment – was contact created
through the purposeful availment of the D? was
contact purposefully availed by D. (how much
benefit is the D really getting from the state)
(WHICH IF THE FOLLOWING TESTS IS RELEVENT)
1. Stream of commerce WWV/Ashi
2. Contract cases – analyzing what are the
factors you look at?(Burger King)
3. Internet – how to interpret information,
level of activity.
4. Effects test (Jones) – (LOOK AT ELEEMENTS
OF TEST)
b. Reasonableness (5 elements)
i. Burden on the D
1. How inconvenient is the burden on the D
a. What kind of D
b. How far is location?
c. In present day there is a pretty high
bar for the D to show that it is
inconvenient
ii. States interest – P a resident or citizen of state?,
where was the location of injury? Is the injury the
result of activity that the state has interest in
regulating? witnesses, protection of citizens
iii. Plaintiffs interests – a lot are the same as states
interest
iv. Interstate interests – look at policy implications,
efficiency considerations, what law is going to
apply, which state has the interest in applying their
state’s law, Joiner consideration, is this a state
where you can join and have jurisdiction Over both
parties.
1. General efficiency considerations
v. ?plaintiff’s interest in obtaining relief in a
convenient forum.
 !!Perhaps the more reasonable the form is the less compelling the min contacts
can be and vise versa!!!

Balance and weigh reasonable and minimum contacts

Notice

Statutory/rule
Outline elements of Rule 4 (e)
1. Is there a Waiver? There is going to be Some attempt at service or notifying
of the D in the case, Similar to exercise
a. Was there an attempt at service to notify the D.
b. Did the D comply with the waiver? If not, without good cause, costs
shifted to D.
i. Wavier:
1. How did it get there? What might other reliable
means be? Email? Fax?
2. If its first class mail there is no issue, meets the
rule
3. But if its some other way, the issue is? Is that
reliable means?
ii. Service:
1. If the D complies with the waiver then you have an
ending
2. If they don’t comply then they have 60 days to
respond, if there is a failure to respond and the P
has to perform personal service. Then the cost can
be opposed on the D, unless there was good cause
and the D waited the minimum amount of time.

2. Is there personal service?

a. Federal method,
i. What - complaint and summons
ii. Who - by someone not a party and 18 years of age,
iii. Where – either personally on the D or at dwelling or usual
place of abode.
1. What is the definition of usual place of abode.
iv. Whom –
1. With person of suitable age and discretion
2. Residing there-in (therein)

IF you have the state statute given to you, then you have to do a statutory interpretation and see if the
person met the statute, if the statute is not given then you just move on.

Or in accordance with state law of state where service is made or where complaint is files (was the state
statute given?)
 Constitution

1. What satisfies due process?

2. Mullane case
a. Notice reasonably calculated to inform interested parties, and
an opportunity for them to present their objections
b. Cost benefit analysis – (what are the additional costs of various
types of service)
1. Which of these is adequate, sufficient or necessary.
i. Publication – lowest cost
ii. Mailing – or some sort of reliable
means
iii. Personal service

Given the facts of the case, how costly is it to do more, to

provide a more formal type of service and what are the
related benefits the individuals that are receiving that
service. What makes sense?

The bottom line is, if there is a reasonable alternative, that

is much more likely to provide notice, then the constitution
basically requires that you give them that notice. But what
is considered a reasonable or conceivable alternative to give
them that notice.

Will only come up if there is some sort of specialized state statute

that only provides for notice in some weird way. And if the D says it
does not meet the constitutional requirement. Then apply the
Mullane test. But if you are following rule 4 then there is not going
to be a constitutional question just a question of is rule 4
statutorily met.

Want what the rule is

Then what the court’s interpretation is

And then do the application to the fact

Important to think about Policy.

Make both arguments, for D and for P. If both arguments are good, the way you can make the
conclusion add something is to include the policy there and explain why the underlying policy makes
one argument better than another.