In which condition can Georgia assert jurisdiction over a non-resident defendant?

Georgia can assert jurisdiction over a non-resident defendant when the claim arises out of the defendant's conduct in the state. This principle is rooted in the notion of "specific jurisdiction." If a non-resident engages in activities that result in a legal claim—such as committing a tort, entering a contract, or transacting business in Georgia—then the courts can reasonably hold them accountable in that state.

This is essential for ensuring that non-residents cannot engage in activities that severely harm individuals or businesses in Georgia without facing legal consequences there. The underlying philosophy is to provide a forum for legal redress that is fair and just, particularly when the defendant's actions have direct connections to the state.

In contrast, simply having minimal connections or ties to the state without a direct relation to the legal claim would not generally suffice for establishing jurisdiction. Similarly, being a resident of a nearby state does not automatically confer jurisdiction based on location alone, and having no ties at all would preclude any jurisdictional assertions. Therefore, it is the nexus between the non-resident's conduct and the state that solidifies jurisdiction in this scenario.