Limited Appearance (QIR#2)
Definition
A limited appearance is a procedural device that allows a defendant to defend on the merits in a quasi in rem type 2 (QIR#2) action — one where the plaintiff attaches the defendant’s property to found jurisdiction over an unrelated claim — without thereby submitting to the court’s full in personam jurisdiction. By making a limited appearance, the defendant contests the claim without exposing assets beyond the attached property to judgment.
Background: Quasi In Rem Type 2
In a QIR#2 action:
- Plaintiff cannot obtain personal jurisdiction over defendant;
- Plaintiff attaches defendant’s property within the forum state to found jurisdiction;
- The underlying claim is unrelated to the attached property;
- If plaintiff prevails, defendant loses only the attached property (no deficiency judgment possible);
- After Shaffer v. Heitner (1977), QIR#2 jurisdiction is now tested under the International Shoe minimum contacts standard.
Elements / Operation
The dilemma without limited appearance: A defendant faces two bad options: (1) default and lose the attached property, or (2) appear and defend, potentially submitting to full in personam jurisdiction on an unrelated claim with potentially much larger liability.
Limited appearance resolves the dilemma:
- Defendant may appear and defend on the merits of the claim;
- The appearance does not constitute a general submission to in personam jurisdiction;
- If defendant wins: Retains the attached property; plaintiff cannot sue again on the same claim in that forum in personam (no personal jurisdiction was established);
- If defendant loses: Defendant loses only the value of the attached property; plaintiff cannot obtain a deficiency judgment for any excess liability above the property’s value.
Res judicata effects:
- If defendant wins: Judgment on the merits bars the plaintiff from re-litigating the same claim in QIR#2 but does not bar a new in personam action in a court with proper jurisdiction;
- Courts are split on the res judicata effect of a defendant’s win in limited appearance.
FRCP 13(a)(2)(B) — Compulsory Counterclaims
FRCP 13(a)(2)(B) excuses a defendant making a limited appearance from the obligation to assert compulsory counterclaims. This exception prevents the limited appearance from inadvertently expanding the defendant’s exposure: if the defendant were required to assert all compulsory counterclaims, the court might acquire in personam jurisdiction as to those claims, defeating the purpose of the limited appearance.
Erie Considerations
In federal diversity cases, whether a limited appearance is available may be governed by state law under the Erie doctrine, since the device is procedural but touches on substantive rights and state policies on territorial jurisdiction.
Policy / Rationale
- Fairness: defendant should not be forced to choose between abandoning property and submitting to potentially burdensome out-of-state jurisdiction on an unrelated claim.
- Respects the limited territorial reach of forum court when minimum contacts for in personam jurisdiction are absent.
- Preserves the distinction between QIR jurisdiction (limited to the property) and in personam jurisdiction (unlimited personal liability).