So far we’ve talked about the general idea of a court
exercising jurisdiction over a non-resident, and I think by now you understand
the issues that creates. So now, let’s look at some specific circumstances
where you might find yourself hauled into court in a different state, or
conversely, if you’re doing the suing, how you can get someone from another
state into court in your state.
In the last post I talked about two concepts – long arm
statutes and due process. Quick recap, and to put things into perspective…. Long arm statutes are the state laws that
give courts of a state the power to exercise jurisdiction over a non-resident.
Due process refers to the constitutional limitations on the exercise of the
power. It will make more sense, and be easier to understand if we look first at
the long arm statutes and then, later look at the limitations on jurisdiction
that courts have imposed on it.
Every state in the country has some form of long arm
statute. These statutes set forth the circumstances under which a person or
company not resident in the state can nonetheless be made a defendant in a
lawsuit in the state. They are not identical from state to state, but are
always very broad.
The long arm statutes of states fall into two broad
categories. Those that specify the acts and conduct that will subject a
non-resident to jurisdiction. Others simply say that the courts of the state
have as much extra-territorial jurisdiction as the constitution allows.
Here are a couple of examples:
Utah’s long-arm statute goes into detail:
§ 78-27-24.
Jurisdiction over nonresidents – Acts submitting person to
jurisdiction.
Any person, notwithstanding Section
16-10a-1501, whether or not a citizen
or resident of this state, who in
person or through an agent does any of the following
enumerated acts, submits himself,
and if an individual, his personal representative,
to the jurisdiction of the courts
of this state as to any claim arising out of or related
to:
(1) the transaction of any business
within this state;
(2) contracting to supply services
or goods in this state;
(3) the causing of any injury
within this state whether tortious or by breach of warranty;
(4) the ownership, use, or
possession of any real estate situated in this state;
(5) contracting to insure any
person, property, or risk located within this state at the time of contracting;
(6) with respect to actions of
divorce, separate maintenance, or child support, having resided, in the marital
relationship, within this state notwithstanding subsequent departure from the
state; or the commission in this state of the act giving rise to the claim, so
long as that act is not a mere omission, failure to act, or occurrence over
which the defendant had no control; or
(7) the commission of sexual
intercourse within this state which gives
rise to a paternity suit under
Title 78, Chapter 45a, to determine paternity for the purpose of establishing
responsibility for child support.
As you can see, this statute spells out in detail the things
that will subject a non-resident to jurisdiction. Compare this to Arizona’s
statute which simply states:
A court of this state may exercise
personal jurisdiction over parties, whether found within or outside the state,
to the maximum extent permitted by the Constitution of this state and the Constitution
of the United States. Service upon
any such party located outside the
state may be made as provided in this Rule 4.2, and when so made shall be of
the same effect as personal service within the state
Within the statutes that are more detailed, there are of
course differences from state to state. In some states, owning property in the
state is in and of itself enough to confer jurisdiction, while in other states,
property ownership, without more, is not enough. The thing to remember about
all of the long arm statutes however is that they are always written as broadly
as possible. If you take time to study some of these statutes you will see that
virtually anything that you do that even remotely affects the state or a
resident of the state could subject you to jurisdiction there.
This overly broad exercise of personal jurisdiction by
states was historically troublesome enough, but today, with internet marketing
and transactions the norm rather than the exception, it becomes even scarier.
For example, taking the long arm statute literally, you
could fi yourself as a defendant in a state hundreds of miles away because you
had sold a resident of that state something on ebay, and shipped it to that
state.
As you can see, jurisdiction is not an academic issue to be
pondered abstractly by legal scholars. It can affect all of us and potentially
have serious consequences.
No comments:
Post a Comment