Also known as: state courts jurisdiction · state-court jurisdiction · state jurisdiction · jurisdiction of state courts
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A state tribunal's authority to adjudicate disputes involving particular parties or property within its territorial boundaries. The Due Process Clause limits this power by requiring that the defendant possess minimum contacts with the forum such that the exercise of jurisdiction does not offend traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice.
Vanessa, a State C resident, sued Dr. Queen in State B after surgery performed entirely in State A. She attached Queen's vacation condominium in State B, which Queen used only for occasional personal trips and on which she paid taxes. The malpractice claim bore no relation to the property. The State B court lacked personal jurisdiction because the bare presence of unrelated property cannot satisfy minimum contacts.
Lulu McGee, a California resident, purchased life insurance from a Texas company that later refused to pay after her husband's death. The company had no other contacts with California. The California court properly exercised jurisdiction because the contract had a substantial connection with the forum and the claim arose directly from that contact.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
A New York mother sought increased child support from her former husband, a California resident who had never visited New York. The couple's children lived in New York with the mother. The New York court could not exercise jurisdiction because the father's only contacts were the original divorce decree and occasional payments, which were insufficient to support specific jurisdiction over the new claim.
A California plaintiff injured by a motorcycle tire valve sued the Japanese valve manufacturer in California. The manufacturer sold valves to a Taiwanese assembler that placed finished motorcycles into the United States stream of commerce. The California court lacked jurisdiction because the manufacturer had not purposefully directed its product toward California or established minimum contacts there.
A New Jersey plaintiff served a California defendant with process while the defendant was briefly visiting California on business. The underlying claim arose from events that occurred years earlier in New Jersey. The California court could exercise jurisdiction because the defendant's voluntary presence in the forum at the time of service supplied the necessary contacts under traditional rules.
A plaintiff filed a federal civil rights claim in state court against city police officers who allegedly violated his constitutional rights during an arrest. The officers moved to dismiss, arguing that only federal courts could hear the claim. The state court properly retained jurisdiction because nothing in the statute creating the cause of action divested state tribunals of concurrent authority over federal claims.
No. When the claim does not arise from the property, its mere presence in the state supplies no minimum contacts and cannot support personal jurisdiction under the Due Process Clause.
Supporting sources
A single contract with a forum resident that has a substantial connection to the claim can support specific jurisdiction, even if the insurer has no other presence in the state.
Supporting sources
Only if the parent has purposefully availed himself of the forum in a manner related to the support obligation. Sporadic payments or an old divorce decree alone are ordinarily insufficient.
Supporting sources
…fact that its principles and corollaries derived from them became the basic elements of the constitutional doctrine governing state-court jurisdiction. See, e. g. , Hazard, A General Theory of State-Court Jurisdiction, 1965 Sup. Ct. Rev. 241 (hereafter Hazard). As we have noted, under Pennoyer state authority to adjudicate was based on…