World-wide Volkswagen • Foreseeability: • Foreseeability that a product will end up in the forum state along is NOT enough • Foreseeability is relevant ONLY in terms of whether the “defendant’s conduct & connection with the forum state are such that they should reasonably anticipate being hauled into court there.”
Summons – Territorial Limits on Effective Service • Rule 4(K)(1)(A) • Federal court has PJ where a state court in the state in which the federal court is located would have PJ. • Example: Michael Scott lives in Houston, Texas and has been sexually harassed by his supervisor, Jan Levinson, who is domiciled in New York. If Michael wants to sue Jan in Texas, what federal court would have jurisdiction?
Summons – Territorial Limits on Effective Service • Rule 4(K)(2) • Any federal court has PJ Where: • The claim is based on federal law; • Jurisdiction is constitutional; and • There is no state that would have PJ. • Can you think of a scenario where this would apply? • Hint: This rule prevents foreign defendants from escaping lawsuits based on lack of PJ.
Question 1 A Michal Scott Paper Company delivery truck leaves Scranton, PA and heads to Storrs, CT. While driving through New York, Ryan hits a pedestrian. Can the pedestrian properly sue The Michael Scott Paper Company for the injuries they suffered in this accident? A. Yes B. No C. Maybe D. Yes, but only if Ryan was not lost or on a frolic
Question 2 A Dunder Mifflin Paper Company delivery truck leaves Scranton, PA and heads to Miami, FL. While driving through North Carolina, Dwight hits a pedestrian. Can the pedestrian properly sue Dunder Mifflin in California, where Dunder Mifflin’s new headquarters are located? A. Yes B. No C. Maybe
Question 3 Schrute Farms operates a beet stand in Scranton, PA but not in Connecticut. Andy, a citizen of Connecticut visits the Scranton, PA beet stand while on vacation. Andy buys a bushel of beets, which he takes back to Connecticut. Once Andy is back in Connecticut he discovers that the beets he bought are all rotten. Can Andy properly sue Schrute Farms in Connecticut? A. Yes, because by entering into a contract with the buyer, Schrute Farms had made sufficiently significant contacts with Connecticut. B. Yes, because Schrute Farms could reasonably foresee that the buyer would take the beets back to Connecticut. C. No, because the buyer only had minimal contacts with Scranton, PA D. No, because Schrute Farms never purposefully availed itself of the benefits of the state of Connecticut.
Question 4 A New York plaintiff files suit in Pennsylvania state court against a defendant incorporated in New York for a claim arising in Ohio having no connection with Pennsylvania. Which form of jurisdiction is necessary to avoid dismissal for lack of personal jurisdiction? A. Specific Jurisdiction B. General Jurisdiction C. Diversity Jurisdiction D. Arising Under/Federal Question Jurisdiction
Question 5 A New York plaintiff sues a Massachusetts defendant in Pennsylvania for injuries suffered by plaintiff in an automobile accident with defendant in Pennsylvania.
- Spring '10