Difference Between ''Personal'' and ''general'' Jurisdiction In Texas
What is the difference between "personal" and "general" jurisdiction in Texas ?
(1) Personal Jurisdiction:
A court may assert personal jurisdiction over a nonresident defendant only if the requirements of both the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution and the Texas long-arm statute are satisfied. CSR Ltd., 925 S.W.2d at 594.
The Texas Supreme Court has repeatedly interpreted the Texas long-arm statute to reach as far as the federal constitutional requirements of due process will allow. Id.
Consequently, the requirements of the Texas long-arm statute are satisfied if the exercise of personal jurisdiction comports with federal due process limitations. Id.
The federal constitutional test of due process consists of two parts:
(1) whether the nonresident defendant has purposely established "minimum contacts" with the forum state;
(2) if so, whether the exercise of jurisdiction comports with "fair play and substantial justice." Burger King Corp. v. Rudzewicz, 471 U.S. 462, 475-76, 85 L. Ed. 2d 528, 105 S. Ct. 2174 (1985).
The minimum contacts requirement is satisfied if either general or specific jurisdiction exists. CSR Ltd., 925 S.W.2d at 595.
(2) General Jurisdiction:
General jurisdiction is present when a defendant's contacts are continuous and systematic, permitting the forum to exercise personal jurisdiction over the defendant even if the cause of action did not arise from or relate to activities conducted within the forum state. Id.
General jurisdiction requires a showing that the defendant conducted substantial activities within the forum, a more demanding minimum contacts analysis than for specific jurisdiction. Id.