Subject Matter Jurisdiction Essay

In determining where a case can be brought, multiple factors are considered by the courts such as subject-matter jurisdiction, as well as in personam or in rem jurisdiction. Subject-matter jurisdiction determines what type of court will hear the case. These types of jurisdiction include exclusive federal jurisdiction, state jurisdiction, and concurrent federal jurisdiction. While state jurisdiction usually only gives jurisdiction within the state, federal jurisdiction extends beyond geographical boundaries. In personam jurisdiction is the court’s ability to rule in a case affecting a person’s rights. In rem jurisdiction is the court’s ability to rule in a case affecting a person’s property. Thanks to long-arm statutes, courts are able
Moreover, our text indicates that the standards of “minimum contacts” were established in the 1945 trial of International Shoe Co. v. State of Washington (Kubasek 2012). In the aforementioned case, it was determined that to meet the standard of “minimum contacts” to be able to hold a trial in a certain state if one of the parties is in another state, the out-of-state party must have held a presence in the initial state, was provided sufficient notice of the suit, and the activities related to the case occurred within the initial state (International, 1945). In regard to Hagan v. Field (2006), the plaintiff filed the suit in Texas against defendants who reside in Colorado. The Texas court requires that the defendant must have established minimum contacts in the state and is in accordance with traditional concepts of fair play and justice to establish jurisdiction on an out-of-state defendant. The trial court ruled in favor of the plaintiff stating the defendants met the standards of minimum contacts in Texas. Since the defendants were only in Texas one time and their business there was not related to the activities in the case, I disagree with the court’s decision. To meet the