Full access allows:
- Solve all tests online without limits;
- Remove all advertisements on website;
- Adding questions to favorite list;
- Save learning progress;
- Save results of practice exams;
- Watching all wrong answered questions.
48. Should the court issue the order?
The defendant has moved for an order dismissing the action based on the personal-jurisdiction challenge asserted in the amended answer.
The defendant answered, denying all allegations. One week later, the defendant filed an amended answer, denying all allegations and including the defense of lack of personal jurisdiction. State A has a long-arm statute that permits personal jurisdiction to the constitutional limit.
A plaintiff domiciled in State A brought a federal diversity negligence action in State A against a defendant domiciled in State B. The action was based on an accident that had occurred in State C. The defendant was personally served with process at her office in State B, which is located 50 miles from the State A federal courthouse. The defendant travels to State A once each year for a weeklong vacation but has no other State A contacts.
Comments (0)
There are no comments at the moment. If you found an error or think question is incorrect, tell everyone about it
Only signed in users can write comments
Signin
Additionally, although a court can establish personal jurisdiction over a defendant if they are present in the forum state when personally served with process, here, the defendant was served at her office in State B, not in State A.
A is incorrect. The defendant timely asserted the defense of lack of personal jurisdiction. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure (FRCP) 12(h) permits litigants to raise personal jurisdiction challenges for the first time in an answer that is amended as a matter of course under FRCP 15(a)(1). A party may amend its pleading as a matter of course within 21 days after serving it. FRCP 15(a)(1)(A). Here, the defendant amended her answer one week after the original answer.
B is incorrect. Service within 100 miles of the courthouse where an action is pending is effective to establish personal jurisdiction only over defendants joined under Rule 14 or Rule 19, not original defendants.
D is incorrect. Under FRCP 4, personal service can occur at any location, not just the person's home. However, State A nonetheless lacks personal jurisdiction because the defendant was not served in State A and lacks minimum contacts with State A.