My flowchart for personal jurisdiction and Erie doctrine.
Posted: Thu Dec 02, 2010 4:21 pm
Please critique or comment this short flowchart that I made for my class.
This is how we're taught for the two topics, so I'm not sure if this might sound weird or not to you guys.
Personal Jurisdiction:
1. Does the long-arm statute of the state apply or not. Only continue if it applies.
2. Is this a general or specific jurisdiction? If General, use the systematic and continuous analysis. If Specific, use minimum contact analysis.
3. Minimum contact analysis include a) purposeful availment (O'Connor and Brennan disagree on their stream of commerce theory), b) whether the act give rise to the suit (this is actually a 9th Circuit criteria that really has to do with differentiating between general and specific jurisdiction) and c) assessing the convenience and reasonableness to hall the defendant into the forum state (includes states' interest, plaintiff's interest, burden on the defendant and judicial efficiency).
Erie Doctrine:
1. Is the source of the law a) federal judge common law, b) Federal Rules of Civil Procedure or c) Congress passed statutes (such as the United States Code) or the Constitution.
2. If a), then proceed with Byrd test (bound up question, twin policy aims or Erie and countervailing federal interests). This is due to the Judiciary Act of 1789.
If b), proceed with Hannah Part II and look to see if the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure is pertinent (whether it conflicts with the state law) or valid (if it is arguably procedural and does not abridge, enlarge or modify any substantive right). This is due to the Rules Enabling Act.
If c), the Rules of Enabling Act won't apply, so only have to answer if the Congress passed statute or Constitution is arguably procedural. If yes, federal law automatically applies (Scalia and Stevens disagree on this).
This is how we're taught for the two topics, so I'm not sure if this might sound weird or not to you guys.
Personal Jurisdiction:
1. Does the long-arm statute of the state apply or not. Only continue if it applies.
2. Is this a general or specific jurisdiction? If General, use the systematic and continuous analysis. If Specific, use minimum contact analysis.
3. Minimum contact analysis include a) purposeful availment (O'Connor and Brennan disagree on their stream of commerce theory), b) whether the act give rise to the suit (this is actually a 9th Circuit criteria that really has to do with differentiating between general and specific jurisdiction) and c) assessing the convenience and reasonableness to hall the defendant into the forum state (includes states' interest, plaintiff's interest, burden on the defendant and judicial efficiency).
Erie Doctrine:
1. Is the source of the law a) federal judge common law, b) Federal Rules of Civil Procedure or c) Congress passed statutes (such as the United States Code) or the Constitution.
2. If a), then proceed with Byrd test (bound up question, twin policy aims or Erie and countervailing federal interests). This is due to the Judiciary Act of 1789.
If b), proceed with Hannah Part II and look to see if the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure is pertinent (whether it conflicts with the state law) or valid (if it is arguably procedural and does not abridge, enlarge or modify any substantive right). This is due to the Rules Enabling Act.
If c), the Rules of Enabling Act won't apply, so only have to answer if the Congress passed statute or Constitution is arguably procedural. If yes, federal law automatically applies (Scalia and Stevens disagree on this).