NAME

Question types


Start with


Question limit

of 39 available terms

Advertisement Upgrade to remove ads
Print test

5 Written questions

5 Matching questions

  1. Actions Constituting Consent
  2. Modern Standard for PJ: International Shoe Minimum Contacts Test
  3. Consent: Implied Consent (Hess v. Pawloski
  4. Modern Standard for PJ; Purposeful Availment - 5 Reasonableness Factors
  5. Modern Standard for PJ: SOC - O'Connor Decision in Asahi (Four in Support)
  1. a 1. Implied Consent 2. Filing an Action 3. Making a General Appearance 4. Express Consent by Contract 5. Appoint an Agent for Service 6. Fail to Raise a Timely Objections
  2. b Placing a product in SOC is insufficient for minimum contacts.
  3. c D, a non resident gets into an accident with P when driving in P's state. State statute says D, by driving on state roads, gave implied consent to be served through a third party in state.
  4. d AKA Shoe Box Test: (draw in shoe box test)
  5. e 1) Burden placed on D 2) Forum's interest in adjudicating the dispute 3) P's interest in obtaining relief 4) Interstate judicial system's interest in resolving disputes efficiently 5) Interest of all states in furthering social policies

5 Multiple choice questions

  1. a. P's unilateral activity of bringing product into forum doesn't satisfy minimum contacts b. D's foreseeability that product might make it into forum doesn't create jurisdiction c. D must reach out to forum to establish minimum contacts
  2. World Wide Volkswagen - D must purposefully avail himself to benefits of the forum
  3. Jurisdiction over a person. Cannot have constructive service
  4. 1) Prior negotiations 2) Contemplated future actions 3) Terms of contract 4) Actual course of dealings
  5. Can be satisfied by doing business in the forum. Such efforts suffice as sufficent to put such a D on notice that it is subject to suit there

5 True/False questions

  1. Choice of Law ClauseIdentify's which state law is to be applied. Does not necessarily mean that the case must be tried in that state only what law is to be applied

          

  2. Original Standard for PJ: Pennoyer v. Neff rulings on in personam and in rem1. If D is present in state or wons property in state, state has PJ 2. State can't exercise jurisdicion over persons or property outside of its territory 3. State must ahve jursidiction at the outset 4. Judement void if court doesn't have jurisdiction

          

  3. Modern Standard for PJ: Purposeful Availment - Reasonableness ConsiderationRelationship between D and forum must not violate fair play and substantial justice/reasonableness

          

  4. Modern Standard for PJwhen given PJ is waived even if the party has no contacts with the state

          

  5. Original Standard for PJ: Presence Standard of PJ (Pennlyer v. Neff)1. If D is present in state or wons property in state, state has PJ 2. State can't exercise jurisdicion over persons or property outside of its territory 3. State must ahve jursidiction at the outset 4. Judement void if court doesn't have jurisdiction