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.
A beneficiary of a trust, who is a citizen of State A, has sued the trustee in federal court in State A for failing to correctly distribute the income from the trust, seeking an accounting. The trustee was personally served with process and the complaint by the beneficiary's attorney while the trustee was vacationing in State A. The trustee is a citizen of State B, and the accounts that are the subject of the trust are located in State B.
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
Here, however, even though the trustee was physically present and served in State A, this type of transient personal jurisdiction does not apply. The trustee is being sued in his professional capacity as a trustee, not himself personally, and he was in State A on a personal vacation. As a result, the trustee's best response is to argue that personal jurisdiction over him as a trustee was not obtained by the attorney's service. Further, the trustee has no minimum contacts as a trustee with State A to satisfy the requirements of fair play and substantial justice. See Hanson v. Denkla, 78 S.Ct. 1228 (1958). Therefore, although the trustee was physically in State A, he may argue that there is no personal jurisdiction because he was vacationing in a personal capacity.