Helicopteros Topic One: The General Jurisdiction Alternative

Helicopteros: Which Key? Transient Jurisdiction Domicile Jurisdiction Consent Jurisdiction Long-Arm Jurisdiction General Jurisdiction

Helicopteros & General Jurisdiction At some point, D’s contacts with the forum state are so “continuous and systematic” that D will be subject to “general” jurisdiction. This gives forum state jurisdiction even over c/a that do not arise out of or relate to D’s contacts with the forum state. Regular purchases & related trips not enough

P sues in Washington

Helicopteros Topic Two: The Nexus Requirement for Specific Jurisdiction

Helicopteros: Which Key? Transient Jurisdiction Domicile Jurisdiction Consent Jurisdiction Long-Arm Jurisdiction General Jurisdiction

FACTS Plaintiffs –4 Americans –Hired in TX –Crashed in Peru –Sue in TX Plaintiff’s ER – Consortio –TX based Joint Venture D Helicopteros –Columbia Corp –Contract to fly ER’s Employees –80% Copters from TX –Pilots trained in TX –Copters picked up in TX –1 trip to TX for negotiations w/ER –Paid with checks drawn on TX Bank Why Wasn’t There Specific Jurisdiction?

Nexus Phrases Phrases: –Arises out of the contacts –Relates to the contacts Does majority apply one or more of these standards? –According to dissent –According to majority Other phrases used –Substantial connection –Discernible Connection

Standards Lower Courts Have Applied Is contact a fact that would ordinarily be alleged in c/a? Is contact an element of c/a? Is contact a “but for cause” of the injury? Is contact a “proximate cause” of the injury? Did contact increase likelihood of a similar injury (even if it didn’t cause this particular one)?

Grocery Hypo Under Each Standard Is contact a fact that would ordinarily be alleged in c/a? Is contact an element of c/a? Is contact a “but for cause” of the injury? Is contact a “proximate cause” of the injury? Did contact increase likelihood of a similar injury (even if it didn’t cause this particular one)?