1 / 15

CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK Choosing a Trial Court

CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK Choosing a Trial Court. +. +. SPECIFIC JURISDICTION. Organization of casebook Chronological Historical tour Categorical In personam v. in rem Contract v. tort. SPECIFIC JURISDICTION. Application of “minimum contacts” Specific v. general jurisdiction

nubia
Download Presentation

CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK Choosing a Trial Court

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK Choosing a Trial Court + +

  2. SPECIFIC JURISDICTION • Organization of casebook • Chronological • Historical tour • Categorical • In personam v. in rem • Contract v. tort

  3. SPECIFIC JURISDICTION • Application of “minimum contacts” • Specific v. general jurisdiction • Contract v. tort • International • Elaboration of “sub-tests”

  4. SPECIFIC JURISDICTIONBlack Letter Law • McGee • State interest • Hanson • “purposeful availment”

  5. SKILLS: STRATEGIC THINKING • Why did defendants take WWVW to S.Ct.? • As pl’s initially configured the lawsuit, could defendants remove to federal court? Why not? • How does dropping Seaway & WWVW affect removal? • What action will remaining defendants take on remand from Supreme Court? • What about the 1 year time limit in §1441(b)

  6. SKILLS: READING CASESThe Caption Mystery • What’s with the caption in WWVW? • Who is Woodson? • What’s with the caption in Asahi? • Superior Court as the defendant???

  7. SKILLS: READING CASESThe Caption Mystery • Extraordinary writs & interlocutory appeals • Prohibition, mandamus • Cf. certiorari

  8. SKILLS: READING CASESVotes & Holdings • Justice O’Connor • Part II-A Rule Choice • Factual Problem Addressing? • Rule Choice Options? • O’Connor’s Rule Choice? • Reasons? • Who joined?

  9. SKILLS: READING CASESVotes & Holdings • Justice Brennan • Part II-A Rule Choice • Rule Choice? • Reasons? • Who joined?

  10. SKILLS: READING CASESVotes & Holdings • Justice Stevens • Part II-A Rule Choice • Rule Choice? • Reasons? • Who joined?

  11. SKILLS: READING CASESHolding v. Dictum • Part IIA: Stream of Commerce Analysis • Has the court (dis)approved? • O’Connor: Holding or dictum?

  12. SKILLS: READING CASESVotes & Holdings • Justice O’Connor • Part II-B Rule Choice • What part of Shoe test addressing? • What factors consider? • How apply to Asahi? • Why? • Who joined? • Holding or Dictum?

  13. TAKEAWAY • Skills: Strategic thinking • “Thinking like a lawyer” • Structuring lawsuit • Procedural rules interact

  14. TAKEAWAYS • Skills: Reading Cases • Understanding captions & methods of appellate review • Holding v. Dictum • Counting votes in split opinions • need to do • how to do

  15. TAKEAWAYS • Black Letter Law • International Shoe “subtests” • State interest (McGee) • “Purposeful availment” (Hanson) • Foreseeability (Hanson, WWVW) • Fairness factors (WWVW, Asahi) • Plaintiff’s interest • Defendant’s interest • Forum state’s interest • Interstate judicial system’s interest

More Related