Sarah E Kimball-Lincon
October 22, 2012
David Feldhein, JD
State of Confusion Paper
Determining the difference between personal jurisdiction and subject matter jurisdiction will help to determine which location a lawsuit should be filed in. Defining interstate commerce and which level of government has the right to place restrictions on the commerce is important when discussing a lawsuit. Understanding how lawsuits work as well as what lawyers will try to introduce within the court will allow the defendant to be able to better predict the outcome of the lawsuit. Personal Jurisdiction
Personal jurisdiction also known as personam jurisdiction is the courts authority over the parties involved in the dispute (Melvin, S.P., 2011, p59). Personal jurisdiction, defined in this manner, the parties involved can be a business or an individual. It is the courts responsibility to determine fairness to all parties involved while complying with the laws of the federal constitutional requirements. The court determines personal jurisdiction over a party who lives in another state by a state long-arm statute. The court must determine if the out of state defendant, transacts business in the other state, commits a negligent act which leads to a loss to the other party, or owns property within the state (Melvin, S.P., 2011, p61). The court will look at Truckers lawsuit to determine if the State of Confusion’s statute causes a loss to Trucker’s business. The injurious effect will be taken into consideration at the lower courts level. Does the statute of the State of Confusion cause an injurious effect on the Tanya Trucker a resident of the State of Denial? Subject Matter Jurisdiction
Subject matter jurisdiction is the courts authority over the dispute between the two parties (Melvin, S.P., 2011, p59). State courts are who handle any matter involving state statues, state common law or a state constitutional issue (Melvin, S.P., 2011, p60). The federal court will only hear matters in which arise from a federal statute or regulation, federal common law, or an issue with the U.S. Constitution. Federal courts may also hear matters when the parties involved are from two different states or if the monetary amount is greater than $75,000 (Melvin, S.P., 2011, p 60). The federal government will only provide a ruling based on state law if the diversity of citizenship is used. Both subject matter jurisdiction and personal jurisdiction must be satisfied before the federal court will be able to hear the case.
In Tanya Truckers case against the State of Confusion the trial should be held in the federal courts within the State of Denial. The basis for this belief is because the matter between the State of Denial and Tanya Trucker is the nonresident (Trucker) is alleging loss to her business by the State of Confusion, therefore, the federal court within the State of Denial will hear the case but base the decision on the State of Confusions state statute as well as follow the Commerce Powers as defined by the US Constitution. Legal Issues
Tanya Truckers attorneys will argue the State of Confusion has passed statues which attempt to regulate interstate commerce. The statue states all B-type truck hitches are required on all trucks which pass through the State of Confusion or the State requires the truck without the hitch to go around the State of Confusion therefore limiting the interstate commerce. This statue directly effects the Commerce clause of the US Constitution.
The State of Confusion will argue the statue does not provide discriminatory laws on out of state business, the statue is a legitimate effort to regulate health, safety, and welfare (Melvin, S.P., 2011, p35). The State of Confusion will further argue the statue allows for the safety of the B-type hitches allows the fellow commuters on the highway protection because of the safety of the hitch which is installed. The hitch will prevent accidents...