Search

State-court personal jurisdiction is regulated intensely by the Fourteenth Amendment's Due Process Clause, which the Court has famously used to tie state-court personal jurisdiction to state borders. Although the Fourteenth Amendment doesn't apply to federal courts, the prevailing wisdom is that federal courts nevertheless are largely confined to the same personal-jurisdiction limits as state courts because of Rule 4(k), which provides that service "establishes personal jurisdiction" in federal court only upon specified conditions, including when the state courts would have personal jurisdiction. Some commentators have further argued that Rule 4(k) sets a limit on federal-court personal jurisdiction independent of service and applicable to all claims in federal court, even those asserted postsummons. Courts have begun to adopt this interpretation. In this Article, I argue against the tide. Such a broad reading of Rule 4(k) would render it invalid under the Rules Enabling Act. I advance a different interpretation: Rule 4(k) regulates only service, not personal jurisdiction. It thus has no applicability to claims asserted without a summons, it has no effect on the scope of personal jurisdiction applicable in federal court, and it is valid under the Rules Enabling Act. This interpretation opens space for consideration of what controls on federal-court personal jurisdiction exist external to Rule 4(k), and I explore those options. I also offer guidance to litigants and courts about how, procedurally, to challenge noncompliance with Rule 4(k) in light of its restriction to service. The end result is a more modest, but more coherent, Rule 4(k). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article explores the expressive dimension of procedural law, arguing that some procedural rules can be usefully understood as instruments of expression: they can express, or be employed to express, values, preferences and attitudes—independently of the economic incentives such rules create and regardless of the specific substantive law that governs the dispute. This is illustrated through two case studies that demonstrate how expressive considerations can underlie procedural rules, court decisions in relation to procedural matters and procedural choices that litigants make. The first is the requirement that litigants conduct civil proceedings in a diligent, honest and otherwise appropriate manner, which operates in part as an expressive norm, allowing courts to impose procedural sanctions as a way to condemn litigants' behaviour. The second case study is the right to self-representation, which has been used by litigants in certain contexts as an act of protest against the legitimacy of the proceedings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Mr. Big operations ("MBOs") are a Canadian invention, a version of which dates back over 120 years, with its modern use beginning in the 1990s. However, it was not until 2014, with the Hart decision, that the Supreme Court of Canada found occasion to subject MBOs to regulation. The question this paper endeavours to undertake is whether the court's new analytical framework, which treats MBO confessions as presumptively inadmissible, has affected the scripting of MBOs - or if there remains a proliferation of the same basic plot points across multiple scenarios. In analyzing the 14 cases in which the MBO took place post-Hart, four of which in-depth - Buckley, Dauphinais, Rockey, and Caissie - the author concludes that Hart has had no meaningful impact on MBO scripting, apart from superficial changes regarding the criminality of the fictional organization the suspect is recruited into, and the level of direct violence utilized. The coercive, manipulative tactics used by MBOs which can induce false confessions remain embedded within the technique. MBOs by their very nature remain problematic, and Hart's legal tinkering has not defused their potential for wrongful convictions and abuse of process. However, despite the merits of MBO abolition, this is unlikely to occur anytime soon. As such, the author proposes several interim MBO reforms: (1) greater external oversight; (2) re-invigorating the abuse of process analysis; and (3) treating MBOs as akin to in-person interrogations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses the legislative changes to the service of process for actions filed in courts in Florida, particularly the enactment of Senate Bill (S.B) 1062, which allows service of process through email or other electronic means. Also cited are the key role played by The Florida Bar's Business Law Section in drafting the S.B. to amend the Florida Business Corporations Act, and the waterfall-based approach for the process on business entities.

28 U.S.C. § 1448 governs the requirements of process after removal, providing that when defendants are not completely or perfectly served prior to removal, plaintiffs may complete such process or service, or new process may be issued in the same manner as in cases originally filed in the district court. There remains an open question as to whether state court service issued prior to removal, but served after removal, retains its efficacy in federal court under § 1448. This open question has led to divergent interpretations among district courts, with differing consequences. As of this Note's publication, at least twenty-seven district courts and one circuit court have grappled with this question and reached various interpretations of § 1448: at least twelve courts have analyzed the text of § 1448 and concluded that state court process after removal is not permitted under § 1448, and at least eleven have concluded the opposite--that state court process should retain its efficacy after removal. At least six courts are somewhere in the middle. This Note explores these different interpretations and attempts to resolve the open question of § 1448 in advocacy of permitting completion of state court service of process after removal. The Note attempts to link the different district and circuit court opinions through the themes of federalism, statutory interpretation, notice provided to the defendant through service, and priority of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure after removal. Ultimately, this Note concludes that these goals are furthered through completion of state court service of process after removal under § 1448, and posits a solution under Rule 4(m) that would ensure plaintiffs' cases are heard on the merits, rather than the technicalities of removal procedure. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article offers information on several court cases in Missouri. The affidavit of merit required for medical malpractice case protects defendants from groundless claims as shown in Giudicy v. Mercy Hospitals East. Ten-year statute of limitations applies to payment bond required on public works projects as indicated in Four Star Enterprises Equipment Inc. v. Employers Mutual Casualty Co. Abuse of process occurs when a party pursues legal process for a wrongful purpose as in Schlafly v. Cori.

The article explores the process of service of process required to provide notice to a defendant under the U.S. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure Four. Topics discussed include the benefits of moving to a modern way of service parties to lawsuits, a historical overview of service of process, the limitations of Federal Rule Four, and the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the service of process.

This note analyses the Singapore Court of Appeal's decision in BWG v BWF which allowed the adoption of inconsistent positions across related court proceedings against different parties. The decision raises crucial questions on the limits to be imposed on a party's freedom to pursue opposing rights in litigation, and how the doctrines of abuse of process, election by waiver, and approbation and reprobation should be applied. It is argued that the court's application of the abuse of process doctrine obscured the central exercise of assessing all the relevant interests and circumstances. The differing rationales underlying the common law doctrine of election and the equitable doctrine of approbation were also inadequately articulated, resulting in ambivalence concerning why they were deemed inapplicable. Finally, there was a missed opportunity to clarify how the doctrines overlap and yet differ. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article explores the advantages and disadvantage of Brazil's accession to the Hague Service Convention (HSC) for serving process and other documents abroad in civil or commercial matters, effective June 1, 2019. Topics covered include the risks of perfecting service of targets in the country, the preparations that plaintiffs should and the advice they need to get via a counsel in initiating any transactional litigation, and an analysis of the serving process in Brazil.

Abuse of process-application for stay' of proceedings-breaches of planning enforcement notices by respondents-appeal withdrawn against enforcement notices as a result of negotiations with local authority-local authority issuing proceedings against all occupiers of site-judge granting termination ruling-whether decision to prosecute improperly influenced by prospect of local authority obtaining financial benefit from confiscation proceedings following conviction-whether first defendant induced to withdraw appeal against enforcement notice-whether judge correct to make termination ruling-Proceeds of Crime Act 2002. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In UBS AG v Tyne (as trustee of the Argot Trust),1 the High Court of Australia narrowly, hut authoritatively, moved the doctrine of abuse of process into the post-Aon era. The Court, divided four to three, was satisfied that Tyne had forgone his 'opportunity to be heard' by earlier discontinuing substantially similar proceedings in a different forum, and accordingly was willing to find an abuse of process in less oppressive circumstances than it had ever been before. The majority found an abuse even where Tyne's discontinuance was effected by the letter of the court rules, and with the express permission of the presiding judicial officer. This article analyses the case and the divided reasons. It then contends that, in a decision that exemplifies the open-textured and flexible nature of the doctrine of abuse of process, Tyne sets a new high-water mark for the doctrine in Australia through the invocation of Aon principles. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article seeks to explore the phenomenon of the so-called "paedophile hunters". These are members of the public who see themselves as protecting children by visiting social media sites posing as children and engaging with adults who seek to exploit children sexually. They typically film subsequent encounters with the adults involved and pass the information to the police to investigate as a potential sexual offence. While the police condemn these activities as vigilantism, it is clear that both the police and courts will act upon the evidence. However, questions are being asked about whether hunters entrap those that they suspect of abuse, and whether the courts should accede to submissions that the actions of paedophile hunters lead to an abuse of process. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses U.S. regulatory developments concerning international litigation, international labor, and employment law in 2018. Topics explored include the coverage of the U.S. Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (FRCP) with regard to the service of process outside the country, the framework of the U.S. Foreign Sovereign Immunity Act (FSIA), and the application of the Alien Tort Statute (ATS) in U.S. Supreme Court case Jesner v. Arab Bank, PLC.

The article presents comments on cases related to abuse of process in Great Britain.

Trial-conspiracy to corrupt-absence of "directing minds and wills " of defendant company-whether fair trial-abuse of process-whether wrong to proceed against company in absence of DMWs [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article focuses on decision of Bangladesh High Court's decision of dismissal and discusses the substance of the petition before ultimately proffering a prediction. Topics discussed include history of secularism in the region of Bengal, India as birth of Bangladesh as a secular nation, how Islam became the state religion, thereby supplanting the principle of secularism and merits of the writ petition and analyzes the legal arguments of its position.

Philip Morris Asia initiated an investment arbitration against Australia with respect to Australia's tobacco plain packaging measures only a few months after it made its investment in Australia. The initiation of the arbitration raised a concern that the scope of protection under investment agreements and investment arbitration may be manipulated by multinational corporations. The tribunal in this case dismissed all the claims of Philip Morris Asia as inadmissible because it considered that the initiation of the arbitration constituted an abuse of process. While the decision is a positive development of law, at least from the perspective of respondent States, the tribunal did not sufficiently analyze the source and content of the principle of abuse of process. Against this background, this article seeks to clarify what the principle of abuse of process means under general international law and how it should be applied in investment arbitration. For this purpose, this article first examines the application of the principle by international judicial and quasi-judicial bodies other than investment arbitration. It then discusses how the principle should be applied in investment arbitration in light of its particular nature. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Prudent investors seek to structure their investments so as to obtain investment treaty protection. But the crucial line between legitimate 'nationality planning' and illegitimate restructuring which renders an investment treaty arbitration an abuse of process is a blurry one. In particular, recent Awards have introduced a foreseeability element to the abuse of process analysis, the scope of which remains largely undefined. This article surveys arbitral practice in the area, and proposes potential refinements to the test. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Fraudulently obtained default judgments ruin lives. Many defendants are ignorant of their cases and therefore do not appear for court. Defendants suffer dire consequences as victims of falsijied service ofprocess. They learn of their lawsuits after their wages are garnished, assets seized, or when their poor credit precludes them from obtaining housing or a new job. For decades, fraudulent service of process has been widespread in high volume court dockets, such as landlord and tenant, debt collection, and small claims matters. Judgments granted to the debt collector plaintiff disproportionately affect low-income communities of color. Some plaintiffs obtained such judgments against defendants who live in mostly black neighborhoods at a rate 18 times higher than it did against defendants in mostly white neighborhoods. Despite this knowledge, the current rules of procedure in most jurisdictions do not require reliable verifications of service. Process servers complete the proof of service themselves, thereby "proving" their service through self-verification. When proof of service relies only on the "honor system, " this is unreliable and unfair, and fails to protect defendants when more reliable technological verifications are available. The integrity of our judicial system is challenged when service-of-process rules fail to use technological verifications to protect litigants from fraud. The current service of process standard requires "notice reasonably calculated, under all the circumstances, to apprise interested parties of the pendency of the action. " Since the U.S. Supreme Court articulated this standard in 1950, the circumstances have simply changed. Therefore, so must our service of process requirements. Traditional methods of service, which lack reliable verifications, are not reasonably calculated to provide constitutionally adequate notice. The technological advancements that have occurred in the decades following Mullane, provide new and better circumstances under which notice must be provided. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California's determination in the 2016 case St. Francis Assisi v. Kuwait Finance House that service of process on an international defendant using the Twitter social networking service is acceptable under Rule 4(f)(3) of America's Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The complaint alleges that two Kuwaiti and Turkish banks and an individual aided the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria terrorist organization.

This Casenote discusses court's analysis of the Hague Convention on Service of Process and the implications of their differing views, concluding that allowing service of process by mail in countries that have not objected to this form of service is the most beneficial solution for all parties involved. Part II starts with an analysis of what Article 10(a) of the Convention purports to accomplish. Part III then discusses the prevailing and countervailing views interpreting the Convention. Part IV continues with a case recitation of a recent Texas case that considered the issue and discussed much of the relevant case law in the area, including the federal circuits. Part V discusses a way to expand the analysis and bolsters the argument about finding that service by mail is acceptable. One argument for allowing service of process by mail is to look to the traditional conception of notice. Under this view, a defendant in a country that allows service of process by mail should be on alert that this is how service might be made to him and should not be surprised. A less compelling argument disallows service by mail due to the fact that it might abrogate the sovereignty of the country; if the state has already accepted service by process of mail it does not abrogate the country's sovereignty. Lastly, in Part VI, this Casenote concludes that in the modern age of international litigation, service of process by mail better suits the needs of litigants. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article reports on the use of social media to effectuate an efficient system for serving defendants in the U.S. Topics discussed include U.S. Supreme Court case Pennoyer v. Neff on progression of service of process; U.S. courts handling of service of process via Facebook prior to the Baidoo v. Blood-Dzraku decision; and framework adopted by Indiana courts for addressing whether service of process via social media would be acceptable in a given case.

The article presents practical advice for Idaho attorneys on how to deal with a default judgment, and it provides a default judgment checklist which mentions summons compliance with the Idaho Rules of Civil Procedure, pleadings, and evidence of damages. Court costs and attorney fees are examined, along with information about service of process and a nonappearance in court by a defaulting party. The Idaho Code and military service affidavits are assessed.

The abuse of process doctrine allows courts to stay criminal proceedings where state misconduct compromises trial fairness or causes ongoing prejudice to the integrity of the justice system (the "residual category"). The Supreme Court revisited the residual category in the 2014 case R v Babos. In Babos, the Supreme Court provided a three-stage test for determining whether an abuse of process in the residual category warrants a stay of proceedings. This article critically examines Babos and its progeny. Notwithstanding the Supreme Court's insistence that the focus of the residual category is societal, all three stages of the test remain disconcertingly preoccupied with the circumstances of the individual accused. Courts'reluctance to give undeserving accused the "jackpot" remedy of a stay has prevented the court from dissociating itself from state misconduct. Instead, courts have imposed remedies which inappropriately redress wrongs done to the accused. This paper suggests four ways for courts to better advance the societal aim of the residual category. First, a cumulative approach should be taken to multiple instances of state misconduct rather than an individualistic one. Second, courts ought to canvass creative remedies in considering whether an alternative remedy can adequately dissociate the justice system from the misconduct. Third, courts should avoid using terms like "unwarranted windfall" and "jackpot" to describe the remedy of a stay of proceedings. Finally, courts need not be so hesitant to stay proceedings. Properly applied, the abuse of process analysis carries minimal risk of "unwarranted windfalls." [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Anuario Español de Derecho Internacional Privado is the property of Iprolex SL and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Advanced telecommunication technologies enable us to employ new methods for judicial acts in the national civil procedure, such as facilitating evidence through a video-link system. However, before implementing these methods in the national proceedings for cases with foreign elements, it is necessary to elucidate the relationship between sovereignty and judicial acts of courts, including the validation of these new methods. This is because judicial acts by courts are considered to fall within the purview of the exercise of sovereignty from a Japanese perspective. From the analysis on Japanese state practices to date, it is recognized that Japan has strictly abided by the principle of territoriality under public international law. Nevertheless, reconsidering the meaning of sovereignty, Japan can adopt a more liberal and tolerant policy. In particular, Japan can become more tolerant of other countries' judicial acts, which may be conducive to the better delivery of justice in transnational civil and commercial dispute settlements. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

An essay is presented on the study of crime prevention based on evidence approach. The research helps makes what works in preventing crime and also understand the process of implementing and sustaining effective action at the government levels. The author believes on the importance of crime prevention evaluation which is through communication for the good of the public.