| Casebook(s): |
Req: Spencer, Civil Procedure, A Contemporary Approach, Revised 4th ed., West
#9781634592727**
Req: Spencer, Federal Civil Rules Supplement, 2015-2016 ed., West #9781634595902
|
| Assignment: |
1. This assignment applies regardless of which version of the text you have purchased.
2. Overview, pages 1-18. This is primarily background material. It is "background" material,
however that your other professors and I will assume (1) that you know; and (2) that you
will use as context for the cases we cover in the first year. Thus, please pay particular
attention to information regarding the following: (1) the U.S. judicial system, including the
differences between "federal" and "state" courts; and (2) "recurring themes", i.e.,
federalism; "law" versus "equity"; judicial discretion; and "fairness" versus "efficiency.
3. Personal Jurisdiction, Pennoyer v. Neff, pages 19-31. Pennoyer v. Neff is a foundational
personal jurisdiction case. It is also an extremely difficult case to read. You will probably
need to read it at least two or three times. Pennoyer actually deals with two cases - one
filed in Oregon state court and in which Mitchell sued Neff. Your job, regarding this earlier
case, is to find out why Mitchell sued Neff; how Mitchell attempted to obtain personal
jurisdiction over Neff or his property; and what happened to Neff's property. Spoiler alert -
when, about 12 years later Neff sues Pennoyer (in federal court in Oregon), Neff argues that
Mitchell never obtained valid personal jurisdiction and, thus, the judgement in the first suit
was a nullity. That is, the judgement was entirely ineffective to bind Neff or other parties. Be
prepared to explain why the judgment was a nullity and why the first court did not have "in
personam" jurisdiction "in rem" jurisdiction, or "quasi in rem" jurisdiction. The author's
notes, on pages 28-30 will be helpful. Please move back and forth between the case and the
author's notes. The assignment will still be quite difficult.
The case remaining note material, on pages 30-31, also discuss exceptions to the personal
jurisdiction principles set forth in Pennoyer. Please be prepared to talk about the
exceptions. In addition, please read the Full Faith and Credit Clause of the U.S. Constitution,
which is discussed in Pennoyer on page 25 and which you can find in Federal Rules Booklet,
at Article IV, Section 1, of the United States Constitution.
The difficulty level of the case has made it something of a cult case. As NYU professor Linda
Silberman has concluded, "Everybody seems to have a Pennoyer v. Neff story." See Linda J.
Silberman, 53 N.Y.U. L. Rev. 33, 33 (1978). Nevertheless, Pennoyer remains an important
personal jurisdiction case. If you have sufficient energy, you may want to read the
beginning of Silberman's article to learn her quite interesting Pennoyer v. Neff story.
|
