In Chapter 2, we cover the topic of jurisdiction.

In Chapter 2, we cover the topic of jurisdiction. In order for a court to have authority to hear a case it must have in personam (personal) jurisdiction over the parties or in rem jurisdiction (jurisdiction over property located within a court's territory). Courts certainly have jurisdiction over the people and businesses within its borders, however, the question arises, if we are talking about state courts, does a court in one state have jurisdiction over persons or businesses who resides in another state. Under the application of the long arm statutes and minimum contacts requirements there are circumstances where out of state people and businesses are subject to rules and laws of another state. One such circumstance is explored in the Sea Polymer Industries v. Med-Express, Inc. case found as Business Case Problem 2-7 at the end of Chapter 2 of the text.

For this discussion you are the judge. What is your conclusion? Apply your legal reasoning in the IRAC format starting with the issue the Business Case Problem suggests: Was Med-Express' statement [it was incorporated in North Carolina, had its principle place of business in North Carolina and therefore did not satisfy the minimum contacts test with Illinois] alone sufficient to prevent the Illinois judgement from being collected against Med-Express in North Carolina? Compare/contrast with "Case in Point 2.2" on page 29 of the text. 

Rule: what rule(s) do you apply?

Application/Conclusion: legally analyze the rule(s) to the facts to reach your conclusion.

What do the circumstances and your decision in this case suggest to a business firm that actively attempts to attract customers in a variety of jurisdictions?

If you operated a business what steps would you take to limit jurisdiction to only your home state?