Due Process in the Internet Jurisdiction: Landing Softly on the Other Side of the Looking Glass
Abstract
This thesis will assert that personal jurisdiction due process protection is often inadequate in Internet cases. The modicum of predictability due process offers to nonresident defendants is sometimes Constitutionally insufficient. However, even if a U.S. state court exercises improper jurisdiction over a non-resident defendant in an Internet case, due process protection can be revived at the choice-of-law and enforcement stages of the judicial proceeding. Courts have differing opinions on what constitutes minimum contacts for personal jurisdiction in Internet cases. Courts are generally more likely to exercise jurisdiction over nonresident Internet defendants where the defendant has been malfeasant. Because the Internet is a global communication medium, this thesis analyzes jurisdiction issues globally by discussing judicial proceedings against foreign defendants in U.S. courts and against U.S. defendants in foreign courts. This thesis will first discuss the evolution of personal jurisdiction law in the U.S. so that the reader gains an understanding of Due Process clause jurisdictional protection. Next, this thesis will discuss personal jurisdiction in U.S. Internet cases so the reader understands how courts have applied traditional personal jurisdiction principles to Internet cases. After exploring U.S. case law, the thesis will explore Internet case law from other countries and compare procedural protections in these countries' courts to those of U.S. courts. Finally, the thesis will discuss how conflicts-of-law and judgment enforcement doctrines link with the Due Process clause to protect Internet defendants both nationally and internationally.
Document Details
- Document Type
- Technical Report
- Publication Date
- Apr 01, 2001
- Accession Number
- ADA456596
Entities
People
- Natalie A. Kolb
Organizations
- The Judge Advocate General's Legal Center and School