I recently had to deal with an interesting legal issue. The relevant facts of the situation were these: a client was sued in a Federal District Court in another state. The client didn’t live in that state. The client didn’t do business in that state. The plaintiff had clearly chosen to sue in that state because they happened to be in that state, even though it seemed like the wrong court to me. What was wrong with where the plaintiff had chosen to file suit? The court in this other state lacked (among other things), personal jurisdiction over the defendant.
Personal jurisdiction is the idea that a defendant must have a proper connection with the court in which he is sued before that court may enter an “in personam” judgment against him. An “in personam” judgment is the type of judgment that requires a defendant to pay money or to obey some sort of injunction issued by the court. An “in personam” judgment is normally contrasted with a judgment “in rem”, which is a judgment regarding some particular piece of property within the state where the court sits. An “in rem” judgment, in contrast to an “in personam” judgment doesn’t impose any legal obligations on the part of anybody to pay money or to obey an injunction, it simply disposes of the legal rights of individuals with regard to some specific piece of property in the state. If a court may lack personal jurisdiction over an individual, he should consider challenging that court’s legal power over him regarding that issue.
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12 should be consulted when one desires to challenge personal jurisdiction in Federal Court. One important thing to note about this rule is the requirement that certain defenses be pled at or before one serves an answer. If the defendant fails to raise these defenses at the proper time, then he waives them. Personal jurisdiction is a defense that should normally be challenged, by means of a pre-answer motion, made before an answer is served in order to avoid any possibility of waiver.
The case law concerning personal jurisdiction is complex, and often vague. When studying this area of law, one will hear buzzwords like “minimum contacts”, “due process”, and “International Shoe”. It is an example of when hiring someone who has experience in law is usually a good idea. It is also an example of why a defendant should hire a lawyer as soon as possible, since a motion challenging personal jurisdiction will normally need to be served on the opposing party within 20 days after the defendant was served with the summons and complaint. (It may seem like a long time, but 20 days goes by very fast when you’ve been sued.)
Posts
