Free Life International, Inc. v Burge, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 21918 (Mar. 6, 2008)
Facts: Free Life is the manufacturer of Himalayan Goji juice. David Burge created a website and posted articles about Himalayan Goji juice on his website, “breathe.org.†Free Life sued Burge for defamation, intentional interference of existing and prospective contractual relations or economic advantages, and breach of contract. Free Life is a Connecticut corporation. Burge, a Hawaii resident that spends a majority of his time in Iowa, motioned the United States District Court for the District of Arizona for dismissal of the suit for lack of personal jurisdiction.
Holding: Burge’s motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction is denied.
Reasoning: Burge claimed that his website was passive, and he therefore lacked sufficient contacts with Arizona to support this Court’s exercise of personal jurisdiction over him. Because there is no federal statute that governs personal jurisdiction in this case, the Court applied Arizona’s long-arm statute that “provides for personal jurisdiction co-extensive with the limits of federal due process.†The Court also applied the Ninth Circuit’s three-part test for specific jurisdiction. Such jurisdiction exists if (1) the defendant purposefully availed himself of the benefits and protections of Arizona law, (2) the claim arises out of the defendant’s forum-related activities, and (3) the exercise of jurisdiction over the defendant is reasonable. The Court found that Burge “purposefully availed†himself to Arizona and his contacts were more than random, fortuitous, or attenuated. Here, Burge signed a distributorship agreement with Free Life that contained an Arizona choice-of-law and forum-selection clause. The Court also found that Burge’s website satisfied the Calder effects test. Burge intentionally created and aimed his site at the State of Arizona, and Burge knew that the brunt of his website’s harm would be suffered in Arizona. Burge knew that Free Life conducted its business in Arizona. Also, the sole purpose of the site was to attack Free Life’s Himalayan Goji juice. As for “arising out of,†the Court held that Burge’s actions in creating “breathe.org†was the basis of the lawsuit. But for Burge’s actions, Free Life would not have brought this action. Finally, the Court held that it was reasonable to hale Burge into an Arizona courtroom. Burge claimed that jurisdiction was unreasonable because he did not interject himself into Arizona. However, the Court did not accept Burge’s claim and held that jurisdiction was reasonable.
Analysis: The District of Arizona got it right in this case. When Burge created “breathe.org,†he knew that Free Life did its business in Arizona. Burge also knew that the brunt of his website’s harm would be felt in the State where Free Life does business. Additionally, even after FreeLife sent several cease and desist letters to Burge, he did not correct his website. In fact, Burge added even more defamatory content against Free Life. While the Court’s opinion does not flush what exactly was written on Burge’s website and whether it was defamatory or not, it is clear that Arizona has personal jurisdiction over him.
Facts: Free Life is the manufacturer of Himalayan Goji juice. David Burge created a website and posted articles about Himalayan Goji juice on his website, “breathe.org.†Free Life sued Burge for defamation, intentional interference of existing and prospective contractual relations or economic advantages, and breach of contract. Free Life is a Connecticut corporation. Burge, a Hawaii resident that spends a majority of his time in Iowa, motioned the United States District Court for the District of Arizona for dismissal of the suit for lack of personal jurisdiction.
Holding: Burge’s motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction is denied.
Reasoning: Burge claimed that his website was passive, and he therefore lacked sufficient contacts with Arizona to support this Court’s exercise of personal jurisdiction over him. Because there is no federal statute that governs personal jurisdiction in this case, the Court applied Arizona’s long-arm statute that “provides for personal jurisdiction co-extensive with the limits of federal due process.†The Court also applied the Ninth Circuit’s three-part test for specific jurisdiction. Such jurisdiction exists if (1) the defendant purposefully availed himself of the benefits and protections of Arizona law, (2) the claim arises out of the defendant’s forum-related activities, and (3) the exercise of jurisdiction over the defendant is reasonable. The Court found that Burge “purposefully availed†himself to Arizona and his contacts were more than random, fortuitous, or attenuated. Here, Burge signed a distributorship agreement with Free Life that contained an Arizona choice-of-law and forum-selection clause. The Court also found that Burge’s website satisfied the Calder effects test. Burge intentionally created and aimed his site at the State of Arizona, and Burge knew that the brunt of his website’s harm would be suffered in Arizona. Burge knew that Free Life conducted its business in Arizona. Also, the sole purpose of the site was to attack Free Life’s Himalayan Goji juice. As for “arising out of,†the Court held that Burge’s actions in creating “breathe.org†was the basis of the lawsuit. But for Burge’s actions, Free Life would not have brought this action. Finally, the Court held that it was reasonable to hale Burge into an Arizona courtroom. Burge claimed that jurisdiction was unreasonable because he did not interject himself into Arizona. However, the Court did not accept Burge’s claim and held that jurisdiction was reasonable.
Analysis: The District of Arizona got it right in this case. When Burge created “breathe.org,†he knew that Free Life did its business in Arizona. Burge also knew that the brunt of his website’s harm would be felt in the State where Free Life does business. Additionally, even after FreeLife sent several cease and desist letters to Burge, he did not correct his website. In fact, Burge added even more defamatory content against Free Life. While the Court’s opinion does not flush what exactly was written on Burge’s website and whether it was defamatory or not, it is clear that Arizona has personal jurisdiction over him.