Top Law Schools

.

Almost nothing if its PvN lol

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e6L90oN4ppY

That's what you need to know.

I had this in several classes and found it to be completely useless. The minutia will be completely irrelevant come final exam time.

drmguy wrote:I had this in several classes and found it to be completely useless. The minutia will be completely irrelevant come final exam time.

This. I think in a way it is trick that is especially more harmful to people right out of UG, where such random babble is often A to B+ material on an exam.

This case is pertinent because it reminds us about (1) judgment validity, (2) the role of the Due Process Clause in personal jurisdiction, and (3) that the constitutional element of personal jurisdiction can be satisfied in several different ways.

Constructive notice is insufficient under American law to inform a person living in another state except for cases affecting the personal status of an American plaintiff (like divorce) or cases that are in rem.

The first case, Mitchell v. Neff (about the unpaid legal fees, for which Neff’s property was attached), was void. If the judgment be previously void, it will not become valid by the subsequent discovery of property of the defendant. Events after this void judgment were fruit of the poisonous tree (yes, I know this is a Fourth Amendment term, but it fits).

These are my notes on Pennoyer, as of yesterday. Good riddance to that bearded bastard. If anyone would be so kind as to tell me that I suck at taking notes, this would be a great time.

Klinklang wrote:This case is pertinent because it reminds us about (1) judgment validity, (2) the role of the Due Process Clause in personal jurisdiction, and (3) that the constitutional element of personal jurisdiction can be satisfied in several different ways.

Constructive notice is insufficient under American law to inform a person living in another state except for cases affecting the personal status of an American plaintiff (like divorce) or cases that are in rem.

The first case, Mitchell v. Neff (about the unpaid legal fees, for which Neff’s property was attached), was void. If the judgment be previously void, it will not become valid by the subsequent discovery of property of the defendant. Events after this void judgment were fruit of the poisonous tree (yes, I know this is a Fourth Amendment term, but it fits).

These are my notes on Pennoyer, as of yesterday. Good riddance to that bearded bastard. If anyone would be so kind as to tell me that I suck at taking notes, this would be a great time.

No

Not sure what your Professor taught you about this case. I would check my notes with someone else in the class though. Based on my recollection what you have written is not correct or complete. But it only matters that you get what your professor wants on the exam.

Sleep in Civ Pro

Wake up when you hear anything relevant in the 21st century

???

Profit

chem wrote:Almost nothing if its PvN lol

Why the hell do they still even cover pennoyer. It's retarded, useless, and makes 1ls even more annoyingly crazy than they already were.

Klinklang wrote:This case is pertinent because it reminds us about (1) judgment validity, (2) the role of the Due Process Clause in personal jurisdiction, and (3) that the constitutional element of personal jurisdiction can be satisfied in several different ways.

Constructive notice is insufficient under American law to inform a person living in another state except for cases affecting the personal status of an American plaintiff (like divorce) or cases that are in rem.

The first case, Mitchell v. Neff (about the unpaid legal fees, for which Neff’s property was attached), was void. If the judgment be previously void, it will not become valid by the subsequent discovery of property of the defendant. Events after this void judgment were fruit of the poisonous tree (yes, I know this is a Fourth Amendment term, but it fits).

These are my notes on Pennoyer, as of yesterday. Good riddance to that bearded bastard. If anyone would be so kind as to tell me that I suck at taking notes, this would be a great time.

PvN is not considered good law. Your best bet is to literally remove this from your notes and focus instead on stuff they can actually test you on, like, gee, personal jurisdiction rules/FRCPs/subject matter jurisdiction/removal/choice of laws/Erie. No prof tests PvN.

Perhaps pay closer attention to the stuff your professor repeats or emphasizes.

Pennoyer is hazing exercise. Unless your prof is absolutely nuts it will not be on the final. Wake up when they talk about International Shoe.

Look at a supplement see if it jives with ur understanding and go with that. It's your first semester so your profs may be stressing facts procedure etc to drill that onto ur head, get u I understand how to read the case. Don't sweat it.

The title to this thread is vaguely sexual

BarbellDreams wrote:Pennoyer is hazing exercise. Unless your prof is absolutely nuts it will not be on the final. Wake up when they talk about International Shoe.

This. Profs just want to scare the shit out of you the first week. This case means next to nothing now. Wait until Int'l Shoe and WWV then start taking good notes.

BarbellDreams wrote:Pennoyer is hazing exercise. Unless your prof is absolutely nuts it will not be on the final. Wake up when they talk about International Shoe.

this is probably true but maybe not the best advice for the OP. I think the real problem is that he's kind of scared by these other gunners. here's all I can say about that: listen to the questions if they seem interesting and relevant to you, and forget them if they seem needlessly tedious or whatever. All you need to know about Pennoyer can be said in a sentence or two - if it isn't brass tacks, these other guys are probably just drilling down too deep.

It's important to drill down deeply on certain aspects of your classes, but pick and choose; you can't know every fact of every case, but remember the ones you do and make sure you've at least got all the basics.

What I would do, maybe if after a few weeks you still don't have a feel for what's gonna be on the test or which Gunner Questions are important or not: Just go to the professor's office hours and ask. Say "Hey, professor, there are always a ton of questions in my inbox; how much should I be paying attention to those? Also, how much of [current topic] do you anticipate being on the exam?"

You may get a vague, generic, or even condescending "obviously you should know every single word I say because I am a preftigious law professor" response, but my experience has been that, if you go and ask, sometimes the professor will be just as surprised as you are that people are asking a bajillion questions about [1840s case] when it's obviously not going to be on the test because it's just something you need to see before getting to the actual stuff that'll be covered on the exam.