Comment by Donna Phillips Currault
This Comment will analyze the finality of an order denying dismissal for lack of minimum contacts. Such an order is not final under 28 U.S.C. section 1291 because it does not end the litigation by leaving nothing for the court to do but execute judgment. Nevertheless, the order should be subject to immediate appeal under the collateral order exception established in Cohen v. Beneficial Industrial Loan Corp. This exception allows a party to immediately appeal an interlocutory decision that conclusively determines the disputed question, resolves an important issue completely separate from the merits of the action, and is effectively unreviewable after the final judgment. The Supreme Court has not addressed the issue of minimum contact appeals. Courts have applied the collateral order exception to many different areas, including double jeopardy and immunity defenses. However, the Court has refused to allow interlocutory appeal in other areas, such as pre-indictment suppression, discovery, and disqualification of counsel orders. This Comment will discuss the arguments both defending and attacking interlocutory review. Next, this Comment will explain how the Cohen factors apply to a motion to dismiss for lack of minimum contacts. Whenever a question of personal jurisdiction is involved, the court must explore the meaning and components of the due process right of personal jurisdiction. This Comment concludes that the personal right of due process is harmed by postponing review until after final judgment.
About the Author
Donna Phillips Currault.
Citation
63 Tul. L. Rev. 913 (1989)