OLD VERSION Best Explanation Video on Personal Jurisdiction - IN PERSONAM JURISDICTION - Civ Pro

Поділитися
Вставка
  • Опубліковано 1 гру 2024

КОМЕНТАРІ • 28

  • @hunteranderson389
    @hunteranderson389 Рік тому +8

    Excellent excellent excellent thorough explanation, especially on the reasonableness factors. Thanks!!

  • @marioraimondi670
    @marioraimondi670 10 місяців тому +2

    Great explanation

  • @cristinavillarrealmeza9502
    @cristinavillarrealmeza9502 2 місяці тому

    This is amazing! Where can I find your outlines?

  • @TheSaintlo
    @TheSaintlo 5 місяців тому +2

    You're simply an extremely smart woman with a beautiful voice.

    • @JDsimplified
      @JDsimplified  5 місяців тому

      @@TheSaintlo Awe! Thank you. I hope the lesson was valuable to your studies.

  • @alanakarmiol5768
    @alanakarmiol5768 Рік тому +3

    THANK YOUUUU!! By far the best video on this topic. How do I access them all?

  • @Dr.HowieFeltersnatch
    @Dr.HowieFeltersnatch Рік тому +2

    When you really think about it, how does the 2021 Ford case not overrule the precedent in WorldWide Volkswagon v. Woodson?
    They are pretty similar fact patterns with opposite holdings.
    I just don’t see how what Ford did was substantially more of a purposeful availment than what WorldWide Volkswagon did. Pretty subtle at best imho.

    • @JDsimplified
      @JDsimplified  Рік тому

      Hi! The Supreme Court actually relied on the Worldwide Volkswagen case to support its decision in Ford. You are right that these two are so similar, and both address purposeful availment. However, Ford conceded that it had contacts within Montana and Minnesota. The plaintiffs in Ford brought their vehicles to the forum, just like the Robinsons did in World-Wide Volkswagen, true. The difference in the Ford case is that Ford had substantial contacts within the forum, whereas VW did not have any contact with Oklahoma (the forum state in that case). Specifically, the Ford Court considered the billboards, commercials, advertisements, and direct mail which were seen or circulated within Minnesota and Montana. Also note that Ford didn’t consider the reasonableness factors.
      Hope this clarifies it! Thanks for watching!

  • @yeahaight3495
    @yeahaight3495 Рік тому +1

    This is great 👍 reviewing Civ Pro as a 1L

    • @JDsimplified
      @JDsimplified  Рік тому

      Every time I get these comments, I smile for hours. So glad you find my vids to be a value-add to your learning experience.

    • @yeahaight3495
      @yeahaight3495 Рік тому

      @@JDsimplified Your videos will serve as the basis for my outline, and I’m going to share your channel with friends! Thank you so much for dedicating the time and effort it took to make these!

  • @WhatWhat-ot5nr
    @WhatWhat-ot5nr 4 місяці тому +1

    SERVICE OF SUMMONS AND SERVICE OF PROCESS IS THE SAME THING?

    • @JDsimplified
      @JDsimplified  4 місяці тому

      @@WhatWhat-ot5nr Service of process is the legal procedure that involves delivering a summons and a copy of a complaint to a defendant, which are the documents that initiate a lawsuit. The summons informs the defendant of the case against them, and the complaint details the allegations of wrongdoing. The delivery of these documents is called service of process.

  • @chadkline4268
    @chadkline4268 2 місяці тому

    No, a court requires territorial jurisdiction in addition. There are 3 forms of jurisdiction that are required. And personal jurisdiction requires US citizen status. A court does not have jurisdiction over actions arising from foreign territory (non-govt territory).
    The event that gives rise to an action must be within the territory of the court, and the judge+jury+attorneys+law must also arise from that territory. A court can't mix+match from various jurisdictions.

  • @lemarcoX
    @lemarcoX 5 місяців тому +1

    where is min contact for PJ?

    • @JDsimplified
      @JDsimplified  5 місяців тому

      In this lecture. You need to watch the whole thing; lol. I promise the lecture gets better.

  • @steves.9644
    @steves.9644 Рік тому +2

    🔥🤓

  • @MattSmith-ji6bj
    @MattSmith-ji6bj 7 місяців тому +1

    way better than barbri

    • @JDsimplified
      @JDsimplified  6 місяців тому

      Awee! Thank you. So glad you found it helpful.

  • @SJ-lm7xz
    @SJ-lm7xz 5 місяців тому

    THE STATE OF STATES are corporations. THE STATE OF NEVADA, Inc. Not the same as The State of Nevada or Nevada State.

    • @chadkline4268
      @chadkline4268 2 місяці тому

      😢
      STATE OF NEVADA =
      State of Nevada =
      Federal territory within a state
      state of Nevada =
      Nevada (state)
      Caps mean a proper noun: a person, place, or thing that is distinguished from the ordinary use of that noun.

  • @luisdiaz8604
    @luisdiaz8604 Рік тому +1

    BETTER THAN BARBRI

    • @JDsimplified
      @JDsimplified  Рік тому

      Awe! 🥹 thank you! It means a lot! I’m going to post supplemental justification in the next few days.

  • @AkSnowflake
    @AkSnowflake 10 місяців тому +2

    A State which is not a living breathing woman or man cannot be sovereign!! This is not correct....

    • @chadkline4268
      @chadkline4268 2 місяці тому

      A sovereign is the owner of land.

  • @chicblackgirl718
    @chicblackgirl718 10 місяців тому +2

    Does anyone know where I can get the outline she provides? Thank you!