Batman’s Brazil Part 1
Issue of whether Nevada has personal jurisdiction over Zuniga regarding the damages caused by
kneeing Neymar in the back.
Personal Jurisdiction – A non-resident defendant may only be required to defend a case in a
particular state’s court if permitted by both (1) the state long-arm statute and (2) the Due Process
Clause of the U.S. Constitution.
(1) Long arm statues
Long arm statues set out criteria for a specific state to exercise personal jurisdiction as long as it
is within what is allowed by the due process clause.
In the case of Zuniga (Z) and his claim that Batman(B) does not have personal
jurisdiction. Assuming that Nevada’s long arm statutes allow Nevada to exercise jurisdiction in
any matter consistent with the constitution, the court in Nevada may exercise jurisdiction over Z
as long as the requirements of the due process clause are met.
(2) Due Process Anaylsis
In order for the Nevada court to exercise personal jurisdiction of Z, he must have had minimum
contacts in the state of Nevada and the action must not violate “fair play and substantial justice”
Minimum Contacts require that the defendant’s contacts in the forum state must be purposeful
and substantial enough that it would be foreseeable for the defendant to be called into court
there.
Z will argue that the incident in which Z allegedly kneed Neymar in the back did not happen in
Nevada there for the court cannot claim specific jurisdiction. B has nothing to argue this point.
The better view is the Nevada court does not have specific jurisdiction over Z due to the fact the
incident did not occur in the forum state.
B, however, will argue that the Nevada court has general jurisdiction over Z which depends on
whether or not the defendant had systematic and continuous contacts with the state.. B would
argue that Z and Z’s agent flew to Las Vegas on 5 separate occasions in July of 2014. These trips
were made to figure out the details of a deal with WWE which will establish Z as a professional
wrestler known as “el backbreaker.” Z is given a suite in the Wynn Casino and the WWE opens
a bank account at the Nevada Savings Bank in Z’s name. B will argue that all of these events
together show systematic and continuous contact between Z and the forum state. B would also
argue that Z was constantly negotiating with the WWE headquarters in Nevada even when Z left
for training in Italy.
Z will come back arguing that all of his trips were within the same month, not over a long and
consistent period of time. Z will argue a short burst of visits to make a deal do not meet the
standard of being continuous. Z will also argue that he did not set up a bank account but the
WWE did it in his name which counts as a contact by the WWE and not him. Z will also argue
that the deal with the WWE had not even been finished. This shows that Z’s contacts in the state
of Nevada were short term and not even guaranteed to be ongoing which further show them to
not be systematic and continuous.
This is a fairly close issue however Z laid a large amount of groundwork in Nevada. Z did not
oppose the bank account being made and had a suite in the casino. This combined with the
continuous negotiating even after Z left the country shows the deal was well under way. The
better view here is that the Nevada court does have general jurisdiction over Z due to the
systematic and continuous relations between Z and the WWE.
Fair and Substantial Justice- Whether the exercise of jurisdiction comports with traditional
notions of fair play and substantial justice depends on five factors:
1)
The burden on the defendant for having to appear in the case
2)
The interest of the forum state in adjudicating the matter
3)
The plaintiff’s interest in litigation the matter in the forum state
4)
The interest of the judicial system in the efficient resolution of controversies;
5)
The shared interest of the states in promotion substantive social policies
1) Z will argue that being held in Nevada places a massive burden on his career as a
soccer player because he will not be able to play while appearing in court. B will argue that Z is
a famous and wealthy soccer player who is about to sign a lucrative contract with the WWE. B
will also argue the season has not yet started and that Z will have time to rebound. The better
view here is that the burden on the burden on the defendant to appear in Nevada is reasonable.
2) Z will argue Nevada has no interest in adjudicating the matter due to the fact Z is not a
resident and has only has contacts with Nevada as of recently. B will argue that Nevada has
interest in adjudication because Batman’s firm who is running the case is located in Nevada and
because Z has business prospects with one of Nevada’s largest corporations. The better view
here is that Nevada does have an interest in adjudication.
3) Z will argue that Neymar’s father is not a resident of the state and that neither is Batman so
they have no interest in litigating in the state in Nevada. B will come back saying that B’s firm is
located in Nevada and has control over the tort claim against Z so they clearly have an interest in
litigating in Nevada. The better view here is that due to the fact HACE LLP is located in Nevada,
they have an interest in litigating there.
4) The better view here is that Nevada has an interest in resolving this controversy. It regards a
possible WWE wrestler who would be working in their state and a large law firm which resides
in their state.
5) Z will argue that none of Nevada’s laws were broken hence they have no interest here. B will
argue that it is against the law everywhere to violently attack anyone. B will also argue that
Nevada has a write to make sure Z is held accountable for violation of those laws considering
Nevada could play a large role in Z’s future.
The better view here is that the exercise of personal jurisdiction over Z by Nevada meets the
standard of being fair and substantial.
Overall, the better view is the Nevada may exercise personal jurisdiction over Z due to the fact Z
established minimum contacts in Nevada meeting the requirements of general jurisdiction and
the exercising of this jurisdiction would be fair and substantial.