CT Bar - Connecticut Bar Civil Procedure: Jurisdiction Questions and Answers

Question 1

A plaintiff residing in Hartford, Connecticut, wishes to file a lawsuit against a defendant who lives in Springfield, Massachusetts, for breach of a contract that was negotiated and signed entirely in Boston, Massachusetts. The amount in controversy is $100,000. The defendant owns a vacation property in Greenwich, Connecticut, unrelated to the lawsuit. Under Connecticut law, which of the following provides the strongest basis for a Connecticut court to exercise personal jurisdiction over the defendant?

Accepted Answer

The court likely lacks personal jurisdiction because the defendant's contacts with Connecticut are not related to the cause of action.

Answer

The correct answer is that the court likely lacks personal jurisdiction. For a Connecticut court to have personal jurisdiction, the defendant must have sufficient 'minimum contacts' with the state such that the suit does not offend 'traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice.' Jurisdiction can be general or specific. General jurisdiction is not present here; mere ownership of property is insufficient to render a defendant 'at home' in the state. Specific jurisdiction requires the lawsuit to arise out of or relate to the defendant's contacts with the state. Since the contract was negotiated and executed in Massachusetts and the defendant's property is unrelated to the contract, there is no basis for specific jurisdiction under Connecticut's long-arm statute, C.G.S. § 52-59b. The plaintiff's residence and the amount in controversy are relevant to subject-matter jurisdiction, not personal jurisdiction.

Question 2

A corporation, incorporated in Delaware with its principal place of business in New York, is sued in Connecticut Superior Court. The lawsuit arises from a tortious injury that occurred in Rhode Island. The corporation is registered to do business in Connecticut and has appointed an agent for service of process. Based on current Connecticut law, what is the likely outcome of the defendant's motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction?

Accepted Answer

The motion will be denied because, in Connecticut state courts, registering to do business is considered consent to general personal jurisdiction.

Answer

Connecticut state courts have held that a foreign corporation's registration to do business and appointment of an agent for service of process constitutes consent to the jurisdiction of Connecticut's courts, even for causes of action arising outside the state. This establishes a basis for general personal jurisdiction in state court, separate from the 'at home' analysis for general jurisdiction or the 'arising out of' analysis for specific jurisdiction. Therefore, the motion to dismiss would likely be denied.

Question 3

In which of the following scenarios is venue proper in the judicial district of Hartford for a civil action?

Accepted Answer

An action for breach of contract where the plaintiff resides in Manchester and the defendant resides in Tolland.

Answer

According to Connecticut General Statutes § 51-345, if either the plaintiff or the defendant resides in the town of Manchester, the action may be made returnable at the option of the plaintiff to either the judicial district of Hartford or the judicial district of Tolland. The other options are incorrect because venue for personal injury is generally where one of the parties resides, actions involving land must be brought where the land is located, and small claims venue is determined by designated small claims areas.

Question 4

A plaintiff files a lawsuit in Connecticut against a company based in Germany that manufactures a product sold through an independent distributor in Connecticut. The plaintiff was injured in Connecticut by the product. The German company has no offices, employees, or property in Connecticut and does not directly advertise there. To establish specific personal jurisdiction over the German company, the plaintiff must demonstrate that the company:

Accepted Answer

Purposefully availed itself of the privilege of conducting activities within Connecticut, such that it should reasonably anticipate being brought into court there.

Answer

The constitutional test for specific personal jurisdiction requires the defendant to have purposefully availed itself of the forum state's laws. This can be established by showing the defendant placed its product into the stream of commerce with the expectation that it would be purchased by consumers in the forum state. The other options are incorrect. Registration to do business relates to general jurisdiction by consent. 'Continuous and systematic' contacts is the standard for general personal jurisdiction, not specific jurisdiction. There is no requirement that a specific percentage of revenue be derived from the state, only that the defendant derives 'substantial revenue' for certain prongs of the long-arm statute.

Question 5

The Connecticut Superior Court is a court of general jurisdiction. This means it has the authority to hear:

Accepted Answer

All legal controversies except those over which the Probate Courts have exclusive jurisdiction.

Answer

The Connecticut Superior Court has general jurisdiction over all legal matters, both civil and criminal, except for certain matters that are exclusively reserved for the Probate Courts, such as wills, estates, and adoptions. The $75,000 amount-in-controversy requirement is for federal diversity jurisdiction. The Superior Court hears civil, criminal, family, and housing cases.

(CT Bar) Connecticut Bar Exam Practice Test

(CT Bar) Connecticut Bar Exam Practice Test

CT Bar - Connecticut Bar Civil Procedure: Jurisdiction Questions and Answers