Also known as: inpersonam · personal jurisdiction
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A basis for judicial authority that empowers a court to render a binding personal judgment against a defendant. The judgment may be enforced against any of the defendant's assets and may be sued upon in other jurisdictions. This form of jurisdiction requires that the defendant have minimum contacts with the forum or be served while present there.
Ivan Ivanov, a California resident, sues Ironclad Industries in the District of New Jersey for breach of a supply contract. Ironclad has its headquarters and all operations in California and has never shipped goods or solicited business in New Jersey. Ironclad files a timely pre-answer motion asserting that the court lacks authority to enter a personal judgment against it.
Ismael Ibrahim, an Ohio resident injured by a defective component, sues a French manufacturer in Ohio state court. The manufacturer sold the component to a German assembler that incorporated it into a finished product sold nationwide. The manufacturer had no direct sales, advertising, or distribution agreements in Ohio.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Iris Irons, a New York resident, sues two defendants in the District of Delaware after an accident in Pennsylvania. No district satisfies the residence or substantial-events rules. One defendant maintains continuous and systematic business contacts in Delaware that would support personal jurisdiction over it.
Ingrid Innes obtains a divorce decree in State A that did not acquire personal jurisdiction over her former spouse. She later petitions in State B for maintenance. The State B court must determine whether she lacks sufficient property for her reasonable needs and cannot support herself through appropriate employment.
Ibrahim Iqbal and his former spouse both reside outside State C. Their child lives with a grandparent in State C. The grandparent petitions State C for custody. The court must decide whether physical presence of the child alone permits it to enter a custody order binding the parents personally.
Ilana Isaacs files a support petition in State D against the child's father who now lives in State E. State D forwards the petition to a tribunal in State E. The State E tribunal must determine whether it can obtain personal jurisdiction over the father to enter an enforceable support order.
In personam jurisdiction empowers a court to enter a judgment that binds the defendant personally and may be enforced against any of the defendant's assets worldwide. In rem jurisdiction adjudicates interests only in specific property located in the forum.
A defendant must assert the defense in a pre-answer motion under Rule 12(b)(2) or in the first responsive pleading if no such motion is made. Failure to do so waives the defense.
No. The defendant must purposefully avail itself of the forum state's market or laws. Awareness that a product might reach the forum is insufficient by itself.
Yes, if the parent resided with the child in the state, submitted to jurisdiction by consent or appearance, or was served while present in the state under the Uniform Interstate Family Support Act.
…of in personam actions. In International Shoe Co. v. Washington , 326 U. S. 310 (1945), we held that a state may exercise personal jurisdiction over a nonresident defendant only if the defendant has “minimum contacts” with the state “such that the maintenance of the suit does not offend ‘traditional notions of fair play and…