APHill wrote:I am talking about suing non-resident defendant.
General jurisdisction - defendant must have consistent and systematic contacts with the state. Action does not have to be based on defendant's contacts with the state.
Special jurisdiction - 1. defendant must purposefully avail himself of the forum 2. the action must be based on defendant's actions related to the forum 3. exercising jurisdiction over the defendant must be fair
First, don't forget presence in the state, even if it is the first time. You are in the state, you get served, bam—Court has personal JX. (Small exceptions apply)
General: Mainly correct. Pretty easy.
Specific JX: There must be minimum contacts, the suit must arise from those contacts, and asserting the jurisdiction must be reasonable.
To meet minimum contacts, you must personally avail yourself of the forum in such a way that it would be foreseeable for you to be haled into that jurisdiction to defend suit. Two ways here you could determine if it was foreseeable, either through the stream of commerce doctrine (aware product is going to get to forum and injury results there), or a stream of commerce plus doctrine (stream of commerce elements, plus that you targeted the forum). The Stream of commerce plus is empirically the majority, but it's JX dependent.
Suit must arise from the contacts: Pretty easy stuff... but remember, can arise simply by function of law.
Reasonableness: Asking whether the exercise of JX is reasonable... Must weigh factors such as, the burden on the ∆, the interest of the forum state, the interest of ∏ in obtaining relief, the orderly and efficient resolution of controversies/administration of the law, and the shared substantive policies of the states in the nation.