The most prestigious law school admissions discussion board in the world.
|
 |
 
|
bar bros - q re family law and jdx
| comical casino | 07/22/14 |
| lascivious toilet seat | 07/23/14 |
| comical casino | 07/23/14 |
| lascivious toilet seat | 07/23/14 |
| Carmine Coffee Pot Queen Of The Night | 07/23/14 |
| comical casino | 07/23/14 |
| Carmine Coffee Pot Queen Of The Night | 07/23/14 |
| lascivious toilet seat | 07/23/14 |
| comical casino | 07/23/14 |
| scarlet domesticated roast beef therapy | 07/23/14 |
| Gold Elastic Band | 07/23/14 |
| comical casino | 07/23/14 |
Poast new message in this thread
Date: July 22nd, 2014 11:51 PM Author: comical casino am i right to say that state courts only require personal jurisdiction?
im on DAT THEMIS and the outlines are dogshit on this point. i seem to recall in the federal jurisdiction lecture the lecturer mentioning that state courts are courts of general jurisdiction and can hear any claim as long as there's personal jurisdiction.
is this right? |
 |
Date: July 23rd, 2014 1:26 AM Author: lascivious toilet seat The need smj too right? And they only have smj if the party bringing the suit to their court is domiciled in that courts state. Even so, they can only render a divorce decree with smj, which will be given full faith and credit in other states, but they need pj to settle property matters (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2625719&forum_id=2#25985371) |
|
Date: July 23rd, 2014 1:33 AM Author: comical casino that's right. ty my brother. that's the ex parte divorce doctrine. much appreciated.
im in a state w/90 day residency rqrmt. i imagine there's in rem for if the marriage occurred there, but DAT THEMIS doesn't even cover it.
~_~ |
|
Date: July 23rd, 2014 1:36 AM Author: lascivious toilet seat Good luck we got this (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2625719&forum_id=2#25985429) |
Date: July 23rd, 2014 1:20 AM Author: Carmine Coffee Pot Queen Of The Night i think that is a cr way of looking at it. family law issues are always state law issues so if there is PJ, then they should be able to entertain it.
i dont think you will ever be faced with a Q that deals with whether the court has smj over a divorce, custody, cp/sp, etc. it will probably be focused more on the pj aspect like if the P has lived in the state long enough to file for divorce in it, whether the property is is in the forum, where the child lives, etc |
|
Date: July 23rd, 2014 1:29 AM Author: comical casino im a dumb man. i didnt realize that the 90 day residency rqrmt was the general basis for smj to grant a divorce. i didnt piece together that that would also apply to distribution, custody, alimony, etc until just this second.
the reason i was confused about the whole thing is bc the uniform child custody jurisdiction and enforcement act has complex rules regarding smj for granting/modifying child custody.
ty for makign me think this through. |
|
Date: July 23rd, 2014 1:31 AM Author: Carmine Coffee Pot Queen Of The Night i thought the child custody rule was essentially where ever the kid had lived for the 6 months prior to the filing and that court had exclusive jurisdiction over it? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2625719&forum_id=2#25985395) |
|
Date: July 23rd, 2014 1:31 AM Author: lascivious toilet seat Cr (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2625719&forum_id=2#25985398) |
|
Date: July 23rd, 2014 1:35 AM Author: comical casino you are right my brother. it's 6 months or since birth, if child not 6 months old. the state that grants has continuing jdx until parents no longer live in state or child no longer [significantly connected to state].
then you have to go to the other weird jdx provisions (default; significant connection) |
|
Date: July 23rd, 2014 1:24 AM Author: scarlet domesticated roast beef therapy Correct. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2625719&forum_id=2#25985368) |
|
Date: July 23rd, 2014 1:28 AM Author: Gold Elastic Band lol no
bankruptcy federal antitrust federal securities admiralty patent/copyright treason ambassadors state vs state |
|
Date: July 23rd, 2014 1:31 AM Author: comical casino right.
i was more concerned with the family law matter.
confusing post i guess. |