Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
This personal jurisdiction is specific to the act, and a party cannot be sued for unrelated activity. In many instances, state long-arm statutes extend personal jurisdiction to the extent allowed by the U.S. Constitution. There are two kinds of personal jurisdiction, general and specific jurisdiction: [2]
Personal jurisdiction is largely a constitutional requirement, though also shaped by state long-arm statutes and Rule 4 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, while venue is purely statutory. It is possible for either venue or personal jurisdiction to preclude a court from hearing a case. Consider these examples:
Because the need for minimum contacts is a matter of personal jurisdiction (the power of the court to hear the claim with respect to a particular party) instead of subject matter jurisdiction (the power of the court to hear this kind of claim at all), a party can explicitly or implicitly waive their right to object to the court hearing the case.
For example, the Commonwealth of Virginia does not recognize the doctrine of indispensable parties. Although a defendant may argue that the plaintiff has improperly failed to join a party that would conventionally be deemed indispensable and may seek to have the court attempt to join the missing party, if it is not feasible to join the missing ...
In the U.S. legal system, service of process is the procedure by which a party to a lawsuit gives an appropriate notice of initial legal action to another party (such as a defendant), court, or administrative body in an effort to exercise jurisdiction over that person so as to force that person to respond to the proceeding in a court, body, or other tribunal.
Under these circumstances, the court found that personal jurisdiction was proper under a theory of national jurisdiction: the defendant had targeted the U.S. at large from outside of the territory and intended to avail himself of the opportunity of selling test answers to a U.S. graduate school entrance test to his most likely customers: Americans.
Early federal and state civil procedure in the United States was rather ad hoc and was based on traditional common law procedure but with much local variety. There were varying rules that governed different types of civil cases such as "actions" at law or "suits" in equity or in admiralty; these differences grew from the history of "law" and "equity" as separate court systems in English law.
The court must have personal jurisdiction over every defendant joined in the action. [3] Compulsory joinder is governed by Rule 19 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, which makes it mandatory for some parties be joined. Parties that must be joined are those necessary and indispensable to the litigation.