Does the cause of action arise out of or PERSONAL JURISDICTION relate to s contacts w/ Was present in the forum state

e when process was served on him?

NO

WHAT STATE? (ITS

YES

MINIMUM CONTACTS THING)

There is Valid General PJ presence is valid basis (split decision in Burnham re: why Brennan (reasonable) Scalia (tradition)

Does the forum states long arm statue provide for PJ over ?
YES

NO

No PJ - even if min. contacts (i.e. const. basis), still need statutory basis as well if not served while present in the state

Is any of the following true? is domiciled in the f.s. (or is a corp incorporated in the f.s.)? has consented to be sued in the f.s.? owns property in the f.s.? regularly transacts business in the f.s.?
NO

YES

There is Valid PJ contacts are so voluntary & unambiguous that they automatically constitute minimum contacts and entitle f.s. to exercise PJ over whether contacts are related or not (General PJ)

Are at least some of s contacts with f.s. voluntary?

YES

YES

No PJ - did not purposefully avail himself of the laws & benefits of the f.s. (Hanson)

Does the cause of action arise out of or relate to s contact with the state? (i.e. Specific PJ)
YES

NO

Are s contacts with the forum state systematic & continuous? (i.e. General PJ)
YES

NO

Are s contacts w/ the f.s. sufficiently great that they should be deemed minimum contacts? - could have reasonably have anticipated being haled to court in f.s.?
Specific PJ McGee pj single contact(insurance K) but solicited bus. in CA thus sufficient Hanson no pj unilateral movement of ; no purposeful availment VW no pj unilateral movement of ; no purposeful availment Kulko no pj sending kids to CA; no reasonable anticipation of haled Keeton pj contact not necessary; distributing magazines sufficient Calder pj actions outside directed at state inside w/ tort conseq BK pj long K w/ forum clause; foreseeable to be haled to court in FL Stream of Commerce Gray pj stream of commerce. (contemplate use in f.s.; made $ of use) Asahi no pj split (O aware not enough; B reasonable anticipation) General PJ Perkins pj company HQ in f.s. created general pj b/c sys/con contacts Helicop no pj not sys/con contacts; purchases/training not related to accident In Rem Shaffer no pj mere presence of property in f.s. is not enough to create general pj; must pass min contacts test
YES

No PJ - Contacts will be deemed not minimum (systematic & continuous contacts are needed where claim does not relate to s contacts with the f.s. to establish General PJ Perkins)

NO

No PJ lacks minimum contacts with the forum

Is jurisdiction reasonable, i.e. does it comport with traditional notions of fair play? Consider burden on interests of the f.s. s interest of relief in f.s.
YES

NO

NO PJ Even though has minimum contacts w/ f.s., due process prevents the exercise of PJ (Asahi b/c foreign s, the burden was too great)

Valid Constitutional Exercise of PJ over