1.3 – Personal Jurisdiction – International Shoe
Assessment Questions
Question 1
Which of the following is not a factor courts consider when deciding whether personal jurisdiction is consistent with fair play and substantial justice?
a
The burden on the plaintiff of litigating in the forum
b
The burden on the defendant of litigating in the forum
c
The forum state’s interest in the case
d
Whether litigating in the forum will promote judicial efficiency
The focus of “fair play and substantial justice” analysis is not on the plaintiff. It’s on the defendant and the interests of the forum state. The plaintiff chose the forum, so presumably, she thinks it’s a pretty good place to try the case. If you’re writing an MEE essay about personal jurisdiction, you’ll earn points by mentioning the factors in choices B, C, and D.
Question 2
Which of the following statements about International Shoe is incorrect?
a
It’s the source of contemporary concepts of general and specific jurisdiction.
b
It tells us to ask how much contact the defendant has with the forum state.
c
It tells us to ask if the defendant’s contacts with the forum state are related to the plaintiff’s claims.
d
It overturned Pennoyer v. Neff.
International Shoe gave us the “minimum contacts” test for personal jurisdiction, effectively adding a way to establish PJ if the scenarios from Pennoyer aren’t available. The traditional grounds for PJ that Pennoyer describes still apply (consent, domicile, service of process). International Shoe just made the list a little longer.
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment. You can get a free account here.