in personam


Also found in: Dictionary, Wikipedia.

In Personam

[Latin, Against the person.] A lawsuit seeking a judgment to be enforceable specifically against an individual person.

An in personam action can affect the defendant's personal rights and interests and substantially all of his or her property. It is based on the authority of the court, or jurisdiction, over the person as an individual rather than jurisdiction over specific property owned by the person. This contrasts with in rem jurisdiction, or actions that are limited to property of the defendant that is within the control of the court. A court with in personam jurisdiction in a particular case has enough power over the defendant and his or her property to grant a judgment affecting the defendant in almost any way.

in personam

adj. (in purr-soh-nam) from Latin for "directed toward a particular person." In a lawsuit in which the case is against a specific individual, that person must be served with a summons and complaint to give the court jurisdiction to try the case, and the judgment applies to that person and is called an "in personam judgment." In personam is distinguished from in rem, which applies to property or "all the world" instead of a specific person. This technical distinction is important to determine where to file a lawsuit and how to serve a defendant. "In personam" and means that a judgment can be enforceable against the person wherever he is. On the other hand, if the lawsuit is to determine title to property (in rem) then the action must be filed where the property exists and is only enforceable there. (See: jurisdiction, in rem)

in personam

‘personal’ (as opposed to REAL).

IN PERSONAM, remedies. A remedy in personam, is one where the proceedings are against the person, in contradistinction to those which are against specific things, or in rem. (q.v.) 3 Bouv. Inst. n. 2646.

References in periodicals archive ?
In personam jurisdiction must be analyzed separately for each cause of action in the plaintiffs complaint and for each defendant, co-defendant, and third party defendant.
Federal courts sitting in diversity actions hearing claims that do not involve nationwide service of process must, under Erie principals, first apply New York State substantive law to determine if there is a statutory basis for in personam jurisdiction under CPLR 302.
Plaintiffs appealed to the Second Circuit which addressed solely the question of whether there was a statutory basis under CPLR section 302(a)(1) for in personam jurisdiction.
This would be similar to the approaches taken by in personam "long-arm" jurisdictional states.
There are court decisions which say the municipality must make an election to use either in rem or in personam.
It should be emphasized that while the derivation of in personam damages from new law is unique to each case, elements such as the property rights of hereditament and devisement and the perpetuation of long-vested, personalized family interests (e.
These laws force recognition of separate in rem real property values and in personam responsibilities as well as the liabilities of real property ownership.
Necessary considerations that result in owner loss may include values attributable to 1) the actual fee/easement take, 2) the resulting damage to the remaining property (an in rem appraisal), and 3) the resulting award necessary to provide for in personam damage to the owner's personal estate resulting from new environmental law liability.
In the first stage of its analysis, the Court found "there was little doubt" that the laws involved in the forfeiture actions in question were intended by Congress to be civil actions, distinct from criminal sanctions in personam.
577 (1931) (civil forfeiture is an action in rem against the property and no part of the punishment for the criminal offense that involves a prosecution in personam against the person).
In general, the standards applicable to issues of tax jurisdiction have traditionally been slightly higher than those applicable to in personam issues, meaning that tax jurisdiction may be found wanting in a situation where in personam jurisdiction is clearly mandated.
In 1925, however, the Court decided an in personam jurisdiction case involving attribution of jurisdiction between related entities.