Professor Franks

Final Examination, Spring 2000

1. Carefully analyze the facts and grasp the issues in each question before beginning to write. Spend time reading the question slowly and carefully.

2. State the issues and answers to each question concisely. Lengthy answers are not necessary.

3. Do not repeat questions in your answers. Write neatly and legibly on only one side of each page.

4. Number your answers to correspond with the question, e.g., "II-A-2."

5. If you feel it necessary to assume additional facts in any of the questions, give the facts that must be added and state why.

6. Do not write in the margin of the book.

7. All major questions are equally weighted unless otherwise indicated. Subparts are approximately equal but may be weighted slightly differently according to the number of issues involved in that subpart.

8. Write your personal identification number and the name and section number of the course on which you are being examined on the cover of each examination book.

9. If you use more than one book, indicate "Book One," "Book Two" and so forth on the cover of each book and write your PIN and the name and section number of the course on the cover of each examination book.

10. A GOOD ANSWER IS NOT NECESSARILY A LONG ANSWER.

The fifty-four plaintiffs are all Irish citizens residing in the Republic of Ireland, most suffering from hemophilia. (Some of the plaintiffs are succession representatives of deceased claimants.) The fifty-four plaintiffs all filed suit in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York against three defendants: Armour Pharmaceutical Company, Baxter Health Care Corporation, and Myles Laboratories, Inc., alleging that by reason of defendants' breach of contract or negligence in the manufacture and preparation of blood products they were each infected with HIV when they were treated in Ireland with blood clotting products manufactured by defendants in America.

Each of the defendants is an American corporation. New York permits market share liability; Ireland does not. New York permits succession representatives to recover for their decedents' pain and suffering; Ireland does not. Federal courts in the United States allow broad pretrial discovery; pretrial discovery in Ireland is very limited. The Federal Rules of Evidence permit the defendants' officers to be called by the plaintiffs as adverse witnesses at trial and to be cross-examined; Irish procedure does not.

The defendants moved to dismiss the case on grounds of forum non conveniens. Judge Robert E. Patterson of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York granted the defense motion. His order dismissing the case reads in part as follows:

In order to ensure that neither party is prejudiced by this determination, defendant's motion to dismiss will be granted on condition:

1. That defendants consent to suit and acceptance of process in any suit plaintiffs file in Ireland on the claims that are the subject of the instant suit.

2. That defendants waive any statute of limitations defense that may be available to them in Ireland.

3. That defendants will afford the plaintiffs discovery in the United States by any of the methods permitted by Rule 26 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure for actions conducted in the United States and that the defendants agree to make available for discovery and trial, and at their own expense, any documents, records, or witnesses, including retired employees within their control that are needed for the fair adjudication of the plaintiffs' claims in Ireland.

4. That the defendants will not act to prevent the plaintiffs from returning to this court if the court in Ireland declines to accept jurisdiction of this action.

The defendants have indicated they agree with all of Judge Patterson's conditions, and have filed a statement agreeing to accept process, waive limitations, and so forth.

Following your graduation from Southern University Law Center, you apply for and are accepted into the LL.M. program at Trinity College, University of Dublin. While there, you accept part-time employment as a law clerk/legal intern in the chambers of the Honourable Ms. Breanna Mulroney, justice of the High Court of the Republic of Ireland. The High Court is a special trial court of unlimited original jurisdiction that hears only important cases, with a direct appeal lying of right to the Supreme Court of Ireland.

Following Judge Patterson's decision in New York, the fifty-four plaintiffs have now filed suit in the High Court. But they seek not damages; rather they seek a declaratory judgment that the courts of Ireland should on grounds of forum non conveniens decline to accept jurisdiction of any action they might file for damages. They urge a declaratory judgment recognizing that plaintiffs have a right to select the most favorable forum, and that in this case Ireland is not the most favorable forum because of:

1. Difficulties in proving the contents of documents discovered from defendants;

2. Inability to obtain attendance of American witnesses;

3. Inability under Irish rules of evidence to call at trial and to cross-examine defense witnesses as part of plaintiffs' case;

4. Absence of any concept of market-share liability in Ireland;

5. Greater ease in establishing liability of the defendants in the United States than in Ireland;

6. The right in New York of the estate of a deceased plaintiff to recover for pain and suffering prior to death, which right does not exist in Ireland.

Defendants, on the other hand, argue that plaintiffs have lived their entire lives in Ireland and received their medical treatment (including the infected blood products in question) in Ireland, and all hospitalization and treatment records of the plaintiffs are in Ireland. Furthermore, the courts of Ireland clearly have jurisdiction.

As Justice Mulroney's law clerk, draft a proposed opinion for Justice Mulroney's consideration and possible signature.

Please answer the following specific questions:

A. Please discuss the difference between:

1. jurisdiction in personam,

2. jurisdiction in rem, and

3. jurisdiction quasi in rem.

B. Please list (without explanation or discussion) the various ways a court may obtain jurisdiction in personam over a party.

Return to The Castle Classroom

Copyright ©2002 by M. R. Franks - ALL RIGHTS RESERVED