1. Burger King

2. What Are Burger King’s Two Requirements for Long Arm Jurisdiction?
Purposeful availment by D.
A reasonable forum (i.e., one that does not offend traditional notions of fair play & substantial justice).

3. Are these two requirements independent?
No!
Sometimes the forum will be so reasonable, that less contact will be required to find personal availment.
Sometimes the contacts will be so extensive that the court will require less to find the forum to be reasonable
If D has purposefully availed itself of the forum,
it will take a “compelling case” to find the forum unreasonable.

4. New phrases describing purposeful availment
No PA if contacts are
Random,
Fortuitous,
Attenuated.
No PA if contacts are the result of unilateral activity of someone other than the D.
PA where contact “proximately results” from D’s own actions that create “substantial connection” with forum state.
PA exists where D deliberately
Engaged in activities within state
Created continuing obligations with forum residents
[For specific jurisdiction], cause of action must “arise out of or relate to” the D’s contacts with the forum.

5. Ways Courts Define a Legal Concept
Single verbal definition
Multiple (vague) descriptive phrases
Decisions in specific cases

6. Grocery Hypo Under Burger King
No PA if contacts are
Random,
Fortuitous,
Attenuated.
No PA if contacts are the result of unilateral activity of someone other than the D.
PA where contact “proximately results” from D’s own actions that create “substantial connection” with forum state.
PA exists where D deliberately
Engaged in activities within state
Created continuing obligations with forum residents
[For specific jurisdiction], cause of action must “arise out of or relate to” the D’s contacts with the forum.