Walking in the Footsteps of International Shoe: Jurisdiction in Family Law Cases

• Publication year: 2015
• Author: Jennifer Riemer

Walking in the Footsteps of International Shoe: Jurisdiction in Family Law Cases

Jennifer Riemer

Jennifer M. Riemer is an associate attorney with Walzer Melcher LLP She practices family law in Los Angeles and Ventura County and is a Certified Family Law Specialist. She is on the executive committee of the Beverly Hills Bar Association, Family Law Section. She is the vice-chair of the child support committee for the ABA, Family Law Section.

One of the exciting things about family law is when different areas of the law intersect. As practitioners, we are required to be knowledgeable about contracts, real estate, tax issues, and everything else. But before a case progresses, we must determine if the court even has the power to make orders as to those issues in the first place. In other words, we must ask whether there is jurisdiction? This article uses the family law petition as a guide to walk through the jurisdictional questions as to each aspect of a case.

1. Personal Jurisdiction

The very first step is to determine if personal jurisdiction over both parties exists to proceed with the action in California. The exercise of personal jurisdiction over the parties must be based on: (1) physical presence in the forum state when personally served with process; (2) domicile in the forum state at the time the suit is commenced; (3) consent to the exercise of personal jurisdiction; or, (4) minimum contacts with the forum state. If both parties are residents of California at the time the case is filed, then the analysis ends there. If they are not, then you should review the remaining bases for personal jurisdiction.

Personal jurisdiction is determined by examining whether each party has "minimum contacts" with California, so that the exercise of California jurisdiction over the person does not offend "traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice." (Cal. Civ. Proc. Code § 410.10; International Shoe, 326 U.S. 310 (1945).) To constitute minimum contacts, there must be an intentional causing of effects in the state by an omission or act done elsewhere, or invocation of the benefits and protections of the laws of the state. (Hanson v. Denckla, 357 U.S. 235, 253 (1958).) Minimum contacts can be (but are not limited to): doing business in the state; having a contract with someone in the state; spending time traveling in the state; or simply being served with process in the state. On the other hand, minimum contacts cannot be established by agreeing to the relocation of a child to the state, travel to California for visitation, or payment of support. (Kulko v. Superior Court, 436 U.S. 84 (1978).)

If the Respondent wants to dispute personal jurisdiction, a motion to quash must be filed within the time to respond to the Petition, or the respondent will be deemed to have waived the argument and consented to personal jurisdiction. (Cal. Civ. Proc. Code § 418.10.)

2. Subject Matter Jurisdiction

Now that personal jurisdiction has been established, we can start at the top of page 1 of the...