Understanding Jurisdiction and Sovereign Immunity in Civil Cases

it may be, but service is not a valid basis for exercising personal jurisdiction over the defendant when service is accomplished by fraud or forcemost states grant immunity from personal jurisdiction to nonresidents who are parties or witnesses in a judicial proceeding

is service + transitory presence sufficient basis for exercising personal jurisdiction over the defendant?

I understand your statement to be related to the concept of jurisdiction in civil cases. In simple terms, jurisdiction refers to the legal authority of a court to hear a case and make a binding decision. Personal jurisdiction, specifically, refers to the court’s power over the parties involved in the case.

Now, to address your statement. You are correct in saying that service by fraud or force is not a valid basis for exercising personal jurisdiction over the defendant. Service of process is the method by which a party is officially notified of a lawsuit. If it is accomplished fraudulently or through the use of force, it would be deemed unconstitutional and violative of the individual’s due process rights.

Regarding your second statement, sovereign immunity is the principle that the government cannot be sued without its consent. Although most states grant some form of immunity to nonresident parties or witnesses in judicial proceedings, the specifics can vary from state to state. In general, though, states recognize that nonresident parties or witnesses are often required to participate in legal proceedings outside their home state, and therefore should be afforded some protection against being sued or prosecuted in that state’s courts.

I hope this explanation helps clarify the concepts of jurisdiction and sovereign immunity for you. If you have any further questions or concerns, feel free to ask.

More Answers: