Download presentation
Presentation is loading. Please wait.
1
CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK Choosing a Trial Court Choosing a Trial Court (Federal or State Court) Subject Matter Jurisdiction Personal Jurisdiction Venue Venue Transfer Forum non conveniens + +
2
Power Personal (Territorial) Jurisdiction Process In personam In Rem PresenceConsentDomicile In RemIn personam Property In State Minimum Contacts
3
SKILLS: READING CASES Analyzing the Rationale Part II: Choosing Between Frameworks Plaintiff’s argument? Basis for TJ under Pennoyer? Defendant’s argument?
4
SKILLS: READING CASES Analyzing the Rationale Part II: Choosing Between Frameworks How do courts choose? Law as an Authority Based System Analogy: lawyers & courts as teenagers Arguing to trial courts Arguing to S.Ct.
5
SKILLS: READING CASES Analyzing the Rationale Part II: Choosing Between Frameworks Law as an Authority Based System (cont.) Judges as Policymakers Wolcher’s Thinker Cartoon “Instrumentalists” Policy & TJ
6
SKILLS: READING CASES Analyzing the Rationale Part III: Effect of the Court’s Decision Minimum contacts & in rem jurisdiction property unrelated to claim quasi-in-rem type 2 property = basis for jurisdiction only
7
SKILLS: READING CASES Analyzing the Rationale Part III: Effect of the Court’s Decision The “inherent uncertainty” of Shoe Rules and standards
8
SKILLS: READING CASES Analyzing the Rationale Part III: Effect of the Court’s Decision The argument from stare decisis
9
TAKEAWAYS Skills: Reading Cases Dissecting the Rationale Authority based arguments Instrumentalist arguments Effects on other cases Rules & Standards Stare Decisis
10
TAKEAWAYS Black letter law Minimum contacts test applies to “in rem”
Similar presentations
© 2025 SlidePlayer.com. Inc.
All rights reserved.