Determining Personal Jurisdiction

Was D present in the forum state when process was served on him?

Yes

There is VALID personal jurisdiction. - Burnham

No
Does the forum states long arm statue provide for jurisdiction over D? Gray & VW

No

The forum state cannot exercise p.j. over D

No
Is any of the following true? -D is domiciled in forum state (or is corp incorporated state) -D has consented -D owns property & is subject -D regularly transacts business in state

Yes

There is VALID p.j.

No
At least some of Ds contacts with the forum state voluntarily?

No

D lacks minimum contacts with the forum and no p.j. need purposeful availment - Hanson

Yes
Does the cause of action arise out of or relate to Ds contact with forum state?

No
general

Yes
specific

Are Ds contacts with the forum state systematic and continuous? Helic

No

Contacts not minimum and no p.j.

Yes No
D lacks minimum contacts with the forum and the forum therefore cant exercise p.j. over him

Are Ds contacts with the state sufficiently great that they should be deemed minimum contacts? - reasonably anticipate be haled into court (VW)

McGee p.j. obligation, premiums from CA residents, witness Hanson no p.j. b/c lack office in FL, business, creation of trust in PA Gray p.j. - product w/ contemplation of use in state tort in state VW no p.j. - car bought in NY as NY residents & P brought to state Kulko no p.j. - sent kids to live w/ mom in state Keeton p.j. suit related to magazine distribution, interest in libel Calder p.j. brunt of harm directed towards state w/ distribution

Yes

Jurisdiction reasonable, comport with traditional notions of fair play? (a) Burden of D (inconvenient litigation) (b) Forum state interest (c) Interstate judicial efficiency (d) Substantive social policies (e) Ps interest

No

Even though D has minimum contacts with due process prevents the exercise of p.j. Asahi not reasonable even for Brennan

The court may constitutionally exercise p.j. over D

Yes

Determining Diversity
Cannot be waived!!
Does at least one side consist solely of foreign countries or citizens of foreign countries? No
Alienage jurisdiction Is the suit between a citizen of a state on one side, and a foreign country or citizens or subjects thereof on the other? Mas Case: 1332(a)(2)

Yes

Is a corporation a party?

Yes

Noo
i.e. only foreigners

No

Yes
The is NO diversity jurisdiction
1332 permanent aliens citizens of domicile

Is an unincorporated Yes entity a party? No Is diversity complete? No P is a citizen of the same state as any D. Strawbridge, Mas

For diversity purposes, a corp. is deemed to be a citizen of: 1. State of Incorporation 2. Principal Place of For diversity purposes, an unincorporated entity is deemed to be a citizen of every state where members are citizens. Continue analysis

Yes

No

Yes
There IS diversity jurisdiction.

Does the amount in controversy exceed $75,000 as made in good faith by P? Mas 1332(a)

There is NO No diversity jurisdiction No

There is NO diversity jurisdiction

Other way to get Subject Matter Jurisdiction Federal Question Jurisdiction 1. 1331 actions arising under the Constitution, [federal] laws 2. No amount in controversy requirement a. Mottley: must be Well pleaded complaint must be a federal claim by P not a defense by D

Removal Ps choice where to file, but D remove state to fed D cant remove if case filed in Ds state of residence Removal statute narrower than diversity statute

1.
filed in state 1441(a)

P could file in fed court - but

Exception: 1441(b)

Diversity cases in Ds home state cant remove

All Ds agree - 1446(b) Within 30 days from time case become removable - 1446(b)