Jurisdiction in U.S. Courts: Subject Matter, Personal Jurisd...

Introduction

Jurisdiction is a court’s legal power to hear a case and enter a binding judgment. In almost every civil or criminal matter, a court must have both subject matter jurisdiction (authority over the type of case) and personal jurisdiction (authority over the parties). If either one is missing, the case cannot proceed in that court.

This guide explains how subject matter and personal jurisdiction work in U.S. courts, why “minimum contacts” matter, how proper notice and service fit in, and where venue and forum selection come into play. You’ll also see how leading Supreme Court cases shape everyday practice.

What You'll Learn

• What subject matter jurisdiction is, including federal question, diversity, supplemental jurisdiction, and common limits
• What personal jurisdiction is, including general vs. specific jurisdiction, “minimum contacts,” long-arm statutes, consent, and waiver
• How notice and service of process affect personal jurisdiction and due process
• How venue, forum selection clauses, transfer, and forum non conveniens differ from jurisdiction
• Practical steps for filing, challenging, and defending jurisdiction
• Key Supreme Court cases that set the rules and how to apply them

Core Concepts

Subject Matter Jurisdiction

Subject matter jurisdiction is a court’s authority to hear cases of a certain type. It cannot be created by agreement, cannot be waived, and a court must dismiss if it lacks it—even late in a case.

• Federal question (28 U.S.C. § 1331): Federal district courts may hear civil cases “arising under” the U.S. Constitution, federal statutes, or treaties. No amount-in-controversy requirement applies.

• Diversity (28 U.S.C. § 1332): Federal courts may hear state-law disputes when the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000 (exclusive of interest and costs) and there is complete diversity between plaintiffs and defendants.

  • Citizenship basics:
    • Individuals: state of domicile.
    • Corporations: state(s) of incorporation and the one state of principal place of business.
    • LLCs/partnerships: citizenship of all members/partners.
  • Domestic relations and probate exceptions mean many family-law and probate matters stay in state court even if parties are diverse.

• Supplemental jurisdiction (28 U.S.C. § 1367): Federal courts may hear related state-law claims that form part of the same case or controversy as the federal claim. Limits apply in diversity-only cases, especially to claims by plaintiffs against additional parties.

• Exclusive federal subject areas: Congress assigns some categories only to federal courts (e.g., bankruptcy, patents, federal antitrust). Many others are concurrent, meaning either state or federal court may hear them.

• Removal and remand (28 U.S.C. §§ 1441–1447): A case filed in state court can be removed to federal court if the federal court would have had subject matter jurisdiction. Some cases cannot be removed, and timing rules are strict.

Key point: Subject matter jurisdiction goes to a court’s power; parties cannot create it by consent and cannot keep a case in a court that lacks it.

Personal Jurisdiction

Personal jurisdiction is a court’s power over a particular defendant. It requires a valid legal basis (usually the forum state’s long-arm statute or a federal provision) and compliance with due process. Due process hinges on “minimum contacts” and fairness.

• Long-arm statutes: Every state sets the reach of its courts. Some states authorize jurisdiction to the full extent allowed by the Constitution; others list specific bases (e.g., transacting business, committing a tort in the state).

• Constitutional limits: Under International Shoe, a defendant must have certain minimum contacts with the forum such that exercising jurisdiction does not offend traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice.

Two main types of personal jurisdiction:

1. General (all-purpose) jurisdiction

• Individuals: A state may exercise general jurisdiction where a person is domiciled. In addition, personal service on a nonresident while physically in the forum (often called “tag” jurisdiction) is generally valid.
• Corporations: General jurisdiction exists where a company is “at home,” usually its state of incorporation and state of principal place of business. Only in exceptional cases will another state be treated as “at home.”

1. Specific (case-linked) jurisdiction

• Focus: The claim must arise out of or relate to the defendant’s contacts with the forum.
• Purposeful contacts: The defendant must purposefully reach into the forum (e.g., targeted sales, contracts, marketing, or activities directed to the state). Random or accidental contacts are not enough.
• Fairness factors: Courts may weigh the burden on the defendant, the forum state’s interest, the plaintiff’s interest, and judicial efficiency.

Other bases and limits:

• Consent: Parties can consent by contract (forum selection clause), by appointing an agent for service, or by appearing without timely objection. Some states treat corporate registration as consent; the Supreme Court recently addressed this in Mallory v. Norfolk Southern Ry. (2023).
• Rule 4(k)(2): In federal question cases, if no single state court could exercise jurisdiction but the defendant has nationwide contacts, a federal court may exercise jurisdiction consistent with the Constitution.
• Waiver: Personal jurisdiction must be raised in the first Rule 12 response or it is waived.

Notice and Service of Process

Even when a court has a legal basis for personal jurisdiction, due process also requires proper notice.

• Due process standard: Notice must be reasonably calculated to inform the defendant of the action (Mullane).
• Federal rules: Rule 4 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure sets methods and timing. Service on individuals, corporations, and foreign defendants has specific requirements, including the Hague Service Convention for many international cases.
• Time limit: In federal court, service generally must be completed within 90 days of filing the complaint (Rule 4(m)), unless good cause is shown.

Defective service can derail personal jurisdiction, even when minimum contacts are present.

Venue, Forum Selection, and Transfer

Jurisdiction answers “can this court hear the case?” Venue answers “which district is the right place within the court system?”

• Venue: Under 28 U.S.C. § 1391, venue is proper where any defendant resides if all defendants reside in the same state, where a substantial part of the events or property is located, or if no district fits, any district where a defendant is subject to personal jurisdiction.
• Transfer: A case may be transferred for convenience to another federal district where it could have been brought (28 U.S.C. § 1404(a)).
• Forum non conveniens: When the more convenient forum is a foreign country or a different court system, a U.S. court may dismiss under this doctrine.
• Forum selection clauses: Courts generally enforce them in contracts, and they strongly influence transfer decisions in federal court (Atlantic Marine).

Venue is about the best location. Jurisdiction is about legal power. You need both.

Key Examples or Case Studies

• International Shoe Co. v. Washington (1945)

  • What happened: Washington sought to collect unemployment taxes from a company with salesmen in the state but no office there.
  • The rule: The Court adopted the “minimum contacts” test and a fairness check under the Due Process Clause.
  • Why it matters: Even without a physical office, purposeful activities in a state can justify jurisdiction.

• Pennoyer v. Neff (1877)

  • What happened: A dispute over land sold after a default judgment entered without in-state service.
  • The rule: Early law tied jurisdiction to territorial power and personal service, or consent.
  • Why it matters: Modern doctrine has moved beyond strict territorial limits, but in-state “tag” service remains valid for individuals.

• Daimler AG v. Bauman (2014)

  • What happened: Plaintiffs sued a German company in California over conduct abroad.
  • The rule: General jurisdiction over corporations is usually limited to the state of incorporation and principal place of business.
  • Why it matters: National or global sales alone do not make a corporation “at home” in every state.

• Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. Superior Court (2017)

  • What happened: Nonresident plaintiffs sued in California over a drug they did not buy, use, or get injured by in California.
  • The rule: Specific jurisdiction requires a link between the defendant’s forum contacts and each plaintiff’s claim.
  • Why it matters: Plaintiffs must file where the claim connects to the defendant’s forum conduct or rely on the defendant’s home forum.

• Ford Motor Co. v. Montana Eighth Judicial District Court (2021)

  • What happened: In-state accidents involving Ford vehicles led to suits where Ford extensively marketed and serviced cars.
  • The rule: “Arise out of or relate to” does not demand strict causation; a strong relationship between forum contacts and the claim can suffice.
  • Why it matters: Targeted marketing, sales, and service in the forum can support specific jurisdiction even if the exact product was first sold elsewhere.

Practical Applications

• Confirm subject matter jurisdiction first

  • Identify a federal question or diversity. Check the amount in controversy and complete diversity.
  • If relying on supplemental jurisdiction, ensure claims share the same case or controversy and watch § 1367(b) limits in diversity cases.
  • Consider removal early; many deadlines run fast, and the forum-defendant rule can block removal in diversity cases.

• Build (or challenge) personal jurisdiction

  • Start with the long-arm statute. Does it reach the defendant for this claim?
  • For general jurisdiction:
    • Individuals: domicile or valid in-state personal service.
    • Corporations: state of incorporation or principal place of business; other states rarely qualify.
  • For specific jurisdiction:
    • Identify purposeful contacts (targeted ads, sales, contracts with forum residents, in-forum conduct).
    • Tie the claim to those contacts; use Ford to argue “relate to” even if not a strict but-for cause.
    • Address fairness (burden, forum interest, plaintiff’s interest, efficiency).
  • Preserve defenses: Raise personal jurisdiction in your first Rule 12 motion or the answer, or it’s waived.

• Get notice and service right

  • Select a method authorized by Rule 4 and any applicable state rule.
  • Plan international service early; confirm Hague Service Convention requirements.
  • File proof of service and track the 90-day deadline.

• Venue and forum choices

  • In federal court, check § 1391 for proper venue. If the current district is inconvenient, consider transfer under § 1404(a).
  • Enforce or contest forum selection clauses. In federal court, Atlantic Marine governs transfer when such a clause applies.

• Special settings

  • Internet and e-commerce: Show targeted activity in the forum (e.g., geo-targeted ads, regular shipments to forum residents).
  • Multi-state or foreign defendants: Consider Rule 4(k)(2) for federal claims when no state forum is available, but nationwide contacts exist.
  • Enforcement planning: A judgment from a court without jurisdiction can be void and unenforceable. Confirm jurisdiction at the start to avoid problems at the end.

Summary Checklist

• Subject matter jurisdiction

  • Federal question under § 1331, or diversity under § 1332 with more than $75,000 and complete diversity
  • If adding claims or parties, check § 1367 for supplemental jurisdiction and its limits
  • Watch removal/remand timing and restrictions

• Personal jurisdiction

  • Confirm a long-arm basis and due process
  • General jurisdiction: domicile (individual) or “at home” (corporation)
  • Specific jurisdiction: purposeful contacts plus claim that arises out of or relates to those contacts; consider fairness
  • Consider consent (contract, registration in some states) and waiver rules

• Notice and service

  • Use a method reasonably calculated to inform the defendant (Mullane)
  • Follow Rule 4 for method and timing; address international rules when needed

• Venue and forum

  • Check § 1391 for proper venue; use § 1404(a) for transfer if appropriate
  • Apply forum selection clauses and forum non conveniens where relevant

• Preservation and timing

  • Raise personal jurisdiction and venue objections in the first Rule 12 response
  • Track service and removal deadlines

Quick Reference