I.

Jurisdiction
a. Basis of Exercise of Judicial Jurisdiction
b.
i. Jurisdiction over the person
How acquired?
- voluntary appearance of a party and his submission
to authority
o over plaintiff:
by filing of suit
o over defendant:
by entering appearance; or
served with legal process within state
by personal or substituted service of
summons (Rule 14, Sec. 6 and 7)
Sec. 6. Service in person on defendant.
Whenever practicable, the summons shall be served by handing a copy
thereof to the defendant in person, or, if he refuses to receive and sign
for it, by tendering it to him.
Sec. 7. Substituted service.
If, for justifiable causes, the defendant cannot be served within a
reasonable time as provided in the preceding section, service may be
effected (a) by leaving copies of the summons at the defendant's
residence with some person of suitable age and discretion then residing
therein, or (b) by leaving the copies at defendant's office or regular place
of business with some competent person in charge thereof.
WILLIAM GEMPERLE v. HELEN SCHENKER
Mrs. Helen Schenker, wife and attorney-in-fact of Paul Schenker, had
authority to sue, and had actually sued, on behalf of her husband;
therefore, she also had the power to represent him in suits filed against
him.
Thus, the lower court acquired jurisdiction over Paul Schenker through
service of summons addressed to him upon her.
ii. Jurisdiction over the res/property
1. Results from:
a. Seizure of property under a legal process;
or
b. Institution of legal proceedings wherein the
courts power over the property is
recognized and made effective
2. Basis: presence of property within forums
territorial jurisdiction

3. Quasi in rem jurisdiction

a. Affects only interests of particular persons
in a certain thing (ex. Quieting of title)
4. Summons by publication
PENNOYER v. NEFF
Substituted services by publication, or in any other authorized form, may
be sufficient to inform parties of the object of proceedings taken where
the property is once brought under the control of the court by seizure for
its condemnation and sale.
Such service may answer in all actions which are substantially
proceedings in rem.
INTERNATIONAL SHOE CO. v. WASHINGTON
The jurisdiction of courts to render judgment in presonam is grounded on
their de facto power over the defendants person.
Since the corporate personality is a fiction, although a fiction intended to
be acted upon as though it were a fact, it is clear that unlike an
individual, its presence without, as well as within, the state of its origin
can be manifested only by activities carried on in its behalf by those who
are authorized to act for it.
Presence in the state in this sense has never been doubted when the
activities of the corporation there have not only been continuous and
systematic, but also give rise to the liabilities sued on, even though no
consent to be sued or authorization to an agent to accept service of
process has been given.
MCGEE v. INTERNATIONAL LIFE INSURANCE CO
SHAFFER v. HEITNER
Delaware law bases jurisdiction not on appellants status as corporate
fiduciaries, but rather on the presence of their property in the State.
Appellants, who were not required to acquire interest in Greyhound in
order to hold their position, did not by acquiring those interests,
surrender their rights to be brought to judgment only in states which
they had minimum contacts.
MULLANE v. CENTRAL HANOVER BANK AND TRUST CO
When notice is a persons due, process that is a mere gesture is not due
process. The means employed must be such as one desirous of actually
informing the absentee might reasonably adopt to accomplish it.

iii. Jurisdiction over the subject matter

allocated by constitutional and statutory laws

more than the general power conferred by law to take

congnizance of general class to which the case belongs. It
is not enough that a court has a power in abstract to try
and decide the class of litigation to which a case belongs;
it is necessary that said power be invoked by filing a
petition.
Cannot be conferred by consent of the parties

IDONAH PERKINS v. ROXAS

The test of jurisdiction is whether or not the tribunal has power to enter
upon the inquiry, not whether its conclusion in the course of it is right or
wrong. If its decision is erroneous, its judgment can be reversed on
appeal; but its determination of the question, which the petitioner here
anticipates and seeks to prevent, is the exercise by that court and the
rightful exercise of its jurisdiction.
iv. Ways of dealing with a conflicts problem
1. Dismiss the case for lack of jurisdiction or on the
ground of forum non conveniens
a. Doctrine of forum non conveniens
- even if the court assumes jurisdiction over the parties and
the subject matter, it may decline to try the case on the
ground that the controversy may be more suitably tried
elsewhere
HEINE v. NEW YORK INSURANCE COMPANY
The courts of this country are established and maintained primarily to
determine controversies between its own citizens and those having
business there, and manifestly the court may protect itself against a
flood of litigation over contracts made and to be performed in a foreign
country, where the parties and witnesses are nonresidents of the forum,
and no reason exists why the liability, if any, cannot be enforced in the
courts of the country where the cause of action arose, or in the state
where the defendant was organized and has its principal offices.
IN RE: UNION CARBIDE
2. Assume jurisdiction and apply either forum or
foreign law
Factors that would justify the application of
internal law
a. A specific law of the forum decrees that
internal law should apply;
b. The proper foreign law was not properly
pleaded and proved; or

c. The case falls under any of the exceptions

to the application of foreign law.
FLEUMER v. HIX
The laws of a foreign jurisdiction do not prove themselves in our courts.
No evidence was introduced to show that the extract from the laws of
West Virginia was in force at the time the alleged will was executed.
The due execution of the will was not established either.
PHILIPPINE TRUST CO. v. BOHANAN
In the proceedings for the probate of the will, it was found out and
decided that the testator was a citizen of the State of Nevada because
he had selected this as his domicile and his permanent residence.
The law of Nevada, being a foreign law, can only be proved in our courts
in the form and manner provided for by our Rules.
The pertinent law of Nevada, especially Section 9905 of the Compiled
Nevada Laws of 1925, can be taken judicial notice of by us, without proof
of such law having been offered at the hearing of the project of partition.
c) Where a case involves any of the exceptions to the application of the
proper foreign law
QUERUBIN v. QUERUBIN
Because the decree is interlocutory, it cannot be implemented in the
Philippines. Where the judgment is merely interlocutory, the
determination of the question by the Court, which rendered it did not
settle and adjudge finally the rights of the parties.
3. Assume jurisdiction: Apply Foreign Law
a. Theory of Comity
HILTON v. GUYOT
No law has any effect, of its own force, beyond the limits of the
sovereignty from which its authority is derived. The extent to which the
law of one nation, as put in force within its territory, whether by
executive order, by legislative act, or by judicial decree, shall be allowed
to operate within the dominion of another nation, depends upon what
our greatest jurists have been content to call the comity of nation.
Comity is the recognition which one nation allows within its territory to
the legislative, executive or judicial acts of another nation, having due
regard both to international duty and convenience, and to the rights of
its own citizens or of other persons who are under the protection of its
laws.

b. Protection of vested rights theory

LOUCKS v. STANDARDS OIL CO.
Public policy does not prohibit the assumption of jurisdiction by our
courts and that this being so, mere differences of remedy do not count.
Rights lawfully vested shall be everywhere maintained.
GRAY v. GRAY
If there is a conflict between the lex loci and the lex fori, the former
governs in torts the same as in contracts, in respect to the legal effect
and incidents of acts. Therefore, whatever would be a defense to this
action if it had been brought in the state of Maine is a defense here,
although it would not be if the cause of action had arisen in this state.
c. Local law theory
d. Modern theories
AUTEN v. AUTEN
Center of gravity or Grouping of contacts theory the courts, instead
of regarding as conclusive the parties intention or the place of making
or performance, lay emphasis rather upon the law of the place which
has the most significant contacts with the matter in dispute.
Having the most interest in the problem paramount control over the
legal issues arising out of a particular factual context, thus allowing the
forum to apply the policy of the jurisdiction most intimately concerned
with the outcome the particular litigation. Moreover, by stressing the
significant contacts, it enables the court, not only to reflect the relative
interests of the several jurisdictions involved, but also to give effect to
the probable intention of the parties and consideration to whether one
rule or the other produces the best practical result.
HAAG v. BARNES
The agreement states that it shall in all respects be interpreted,
construed and governed by the laws of the State of Illinois. It was also
drawn and signed by the complainant in Illinois.
Even if these were not given decisive effect, they would be given heavy
weight in determining which jurisdiction has the most significant
contacts with the matter in dispute.
Other contacts:
1. parties designated as being from Chicago, Illinois
2. child was born in Illinois
3. agents are Illinois residents
4. all contributions are made from Chicago