How JustAnswer Works:
  • Ask an Expert
    Experts are full of valuable knowledge and are ready to help with any question. Credentials confirmed by a Fortune 500 verification firm.
  • Get a Professional Answer
    Via email, text message, or notification as you wait on our site.
    Ask follow up questions if you need to.
  • 100% Satisfaction Guarantee
    Rate the answer you receive.
Ask John Your Own Question
John, Attorney
Category: Legal
Satisfied Customers: 5557
Experience:  Licensed and practicing attorney.
Type Your Legal Question Here...
John is online now
A new question is answered every 9 seconds

What means "admitted for jurisdictional purposes only" in an

This answer was rated:

What means "admitted for jurisdictional purposes only" in an answer to a complaint ?
What type of case is this?
Where is the term in question being used?
Is this to admit evidence or to admit an attorney?
Customer: replied 4 years ago.

civil - >>>used in an answer to a complaint

I will have to opt out since I have no way of know in what context it is being used and by whom.
Customer: replied 4 years ago.

context : Defendant's answers to Plaintiff's complaint - civil case

It is an answer of Defendant to an allegation of Plaintiff

Hi, your prior expert opted out. I'll be happy to assist you today. It's very unusual for someone to answer any allegation of a complaint as "admitted for jurisdictional purposes only", and it is not a response sanctioned by the court rules which state a party can only answer an allegation in one of three ways -admit, deny with a specific reason as to why the allegation is denied, or state that the answering party is without sufficient knowledge to provide a response.

So what this particular answer seems to be attempting to do is admit with a qualification, which isn't necessarily allowed by the court rules. Specifically, what he/she appears to want to do is admit to the allegation for purposes of jurisdiction. What jurisdiction means is that the court has proper legal authority over the person(s) and the subject of the case - for example a court in California usually would not have personal jurisdiction of a case where all the parties lived in New York. Or, a federal court wouldn't have subject matter jurisdiction between two residents of the same state or a claim of residents of two states less than $77,000. So, what your particular answering party seems to be answering is that he does not contest personal or subject matter jurisdiction that the allegation may bring up, but he reserves the right to challenge as it relates to the substance of the elements of the particular cause of action. It's not technically a correct answer, you cannot qualify an admission.

I believe this answers your question. However, if you need clarification or have follow-up questions regarding this matter, I will be happy to continue our conversation – select the Reply to Expert or Continue Conversation button. If you are otherwise satisfied with my response, please leave a positive rating as it is the only way I am able to get credit for my answers. Thank you, XXXXX XXXXX wish you all the best with this matter.

John, Attorney
Category: Legal
Satisfied Customers: 5557
Experience: Licensed and practicing attorney.
John and other Legal Specialists are ready to help you