Also known as: hale into court · hales into court · haling into court · dragged into court · brought before the court
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A situation in which a party is compelled to appear before a court to answer a claim or charge. The phrase is frequently invoked when analyzing whether a defendant could reasonably anticipate litigation in a given forum.
Harmony Retail regularly ships its monthly catalog into Vermont and sells hundreds of copies there each year. When one issue contains a false statement harming a Vermont contractor, the contractor files a libel action in Vermont state court. Harmony Retail moves to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction. The court denies the motion because the regular circulation allows the company to anticipate being haled into court in Vermont.
Hakim Hall is charged with felony theft in state court and cannot afford an attorney. He requests appointed counsel at arraignment. The trial court denies the request and proceeds to trial. On appeal Hall argues that any person haled into court without counsel cannot receive a fair trial under the adversary system.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Hector Hernandez is charged with breaking and entering and appears in state court without funds for counsel. The trial judge refuses to appoint a lawyer. After conviction Hernandez challenges the judgment. The reviewing court holds that any person haled into court who is too poor to hire a lawyer cannot be assured a fair trial unless counsel is provided.
Heidi Henderson files a federal diversity action against Highland Farms and adds a state-law claim against a nondiverse co-defendant. The co-defendant moves to dismiss the supplemental claim. The court grants the motion because a plaintiff who voluntarily chooses federal court must accept its limitations, unlike a defending party haled into court against its will.
Hana Hashimoto, a Nevada resident, is injured in a collision with a state-owned vehicle driven by a Nevada employee in California. She sues Nevada in California state court. Nevada moves to dismiss on sovereign immunity grounds. The court denies the motion because a state that sends its agents into another state can reasonably anticipate being haled into court there.
Hyun Han writes and edits a tabloid article in Florida that accuses a California actress of misconduct. The tabloid sells thousands of copies in California. The actress sues Han and the publisher in California state court. The defendants move to dismiss. The court denies the motion because the defendants knew the article would cause harm in California and could reasonably anticipate being haled into court there.
A defendant must demonstrate that it did not purposefully direct activities at the forum state. Mere foreseeability that a product might reach the forum through unilateral third-party action is insufficient. The defendant must lack minimum contacts that would make suit there foreseeable under due process.
Supporting sources
Yes. Consistent sales and advertising revenue in the forum demonstrate that the publisher exploited the market and created minimum contacts. The publisher therefore can reasonably anticipate suit in that state for libel arising from the publication.
Supporting sources
No. The defendant must have purposefully availed itself of the forum market. Unilateral consumer conduct that brings the product into the forum does not satisfy the minimum contacts requirement.
Supporting sources
…could not be sustained on the basis of the State's power over property within its borders because that property had not been brought before the court by attachment or any other procedure prior to judgment. Since the judgment which authorized the sheriff's sale was therefore invalid, the sale transferred no title. Neff regained his…