Study Questions on the Pennoyer Framework

1) Consider the following cases:

a) Mitchell, an Oregon resident, sues Neff, a California resident, in Oregon state court for unpaid lawyer’s fees that Neff incurred in Oregon while he was a resident of Oregon. Service of the summons and complaint are delivered to Neff in hand in California. PJ?

b) Mitchell, an Oregon resident, sues Neff, a California resident, in Oregon state court for unpaid lawyer’s fees that Neff incurred in  Oregon while he was a resident of Oregon. There is in-hand service of the summons and complaint upon Neff while he is in Oregon on a brief business trip. PJ?

c) Mitchell, an Oregon resident, sues Neff, a California resident, in Oregon state court for unpaid lawyer’s fees that Neff incurred to Mitchell in California – Neff was never an Oregon resident. There is in-hand service of the summons and complaint upon Neff while he is in Oregon on a brief business trip. PJ?

2) Does an in rem case always have to have publication as its form of service? Does an in personam case always have to have in hand service?

3) Consider the following cases. Is there personal jurisdiction according to the Pennoyer regime? If there is, is it in rem or in personam?

a) Pennoyer and Neff both reside in Oregon. Neff sues Pennoyer in order to get him to remove trash from property in California that Pennoyer left there. Service is in hand on Pennoyer in Oregon.

b) Pennoyer, an Oregon resident, sues Neff, a California resident, in Oregon state court in order to quiet Pennoyer's title to Oregon property that each claims he owns. Service on Neff is in-hand in California.

c) Pennoyer, an Oregon resident, brings a suit to quiet title to Oregon property that he claims he owns. He brings an action in Oregon state court that he hopes will bind everyone in the world, in the sense that after there is a decision in his favor, everyone will be claim precluded from bringing a new suit claiming ownership of the property. Service is by publication.

d) Same as c, except the action is brought in California state court.

e) Pennoyer, an Oregon resident, sues Neff, a California resident, in Oregon state court in order to compel Neff to abide by their contract of sale and turn over to Pennoyer property in California. Service is in hand on Neff in Oregon.

f) Mitchell brings an action against Neff in Oregon state court concerning $253.14 in legal fees. Neff resides in California. The Oregon state court attaches property owned by Neff worth $300 at the beginning of the suit.