Yeazell, pp. 191-212: Self-Imposed
Restraints on Jurisdictional Power: Long-Arm Statutes, Venue, and Discretionary
Refusal of Jurisdiction
We
have assumed so far that the only issues of jurisdiction are
constitutional. It turns out that there
are situations where jurisdiction is constricted further than the outer bounds
set by the Constitution.
1. Long-Arm
Statutes as a Restraint on Jurisdiction
Many
states authorize their courts to exercise jurisdiction over defendants in other
states.
Case:
Gibbons v. Brown
2. Venue as a
Further Localizing Principle
Venue
is purely statutory. However, the
statutes tend to recapitulate the standards for personal jurisdiction (contacts
or where a defendant resides, for example).
There needs to be a separate law for venue because it gets more specific
than personal jurisdiction.
Case:
Dee-K Enterprises, Inc. v.
Heveafil Sdn. Bhd.
3. Declining Jurisdiction:
Transfer and Forum Non Conveniens
Courts
can choose not to hear a case over which they otherwise would have proper venue
and jurisdiction. The court may
conclude, for example, that there is a local prejudice against one of the
parties that will keep them from getting a fair trial. The court also may find that important
witnesses for whom travel is difficult may not be able to make it to the
current venue.
a. Forum
Non Conveniens
Case:
Piper Aircraft v. Reyno