Print:Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn

[sohanuzzaman56]

According to the Court, general jurisdiction is lacking because Feder and his law firm are residents of, or incorporated in, the state of New Jersey—and the alleged contractual agreement between the Feder defendants and PLG, which ultimately led to calls to Texas residents, is “insufficient” to demonstrate the “continuous and systematic contacts with the State of Texas required for general personal jurisdiction.” The holding is significant for TCPA defendants facing class actions because it could amazon data limit the jurisdictions in which plaintiffs can file nationwide class actions. If courts apply Bristol-Myers Squibb to class actions, the implications could be huge as finding multiple plaintiffs in different states is not always possible for plaintiffs’ lawyers in TCPA cases, meaning that they will be restricted to a single state class if they want to sue in their chosen forum. In the alternative, they will be forced out of their comfort zone to sue in the defendant’s home forum.

While specific jurisdiction appeared to create a tougher question for the Court, it ultimately determined that even though the Feder defendants entered into a contract with a Texas entity that placed calls to individuals in Texas, nothing in the record indicated that the contracted-for efforts targeted Texas “because the contacted phone numbers are associated with an area code in Tennessee.” Thus, neither Feder as an individual or the law firm had fair warning that they could be sued in Texas, and were not subject to jurisdiction in Texas, regardless of whether calls were placed to individuals there.

Because specific jurisdiction hinges on whether the cause of action is related to, or arises out of, the defendant’s contacts with the forum state and those contacts meet the due process standard, it is an issue that presents itself in unique ways in TCPA cases. Practically speaking, a defendant’s calls from one state to residents of a targeted state could land in an altogether different state. It is no secret that there are certain jurisdictions where plaintiffs’ class action attorneys prefer to file suit, especially now with a circuit split like the one present in Dominguez and Marks. Cunningham and the string of similar cases to emerge since Bristol-Myers Squibb signal hope that plaintiffs’ days of forum shopping may be numbered.

Photo of Virginia Bell Flynn
Virginia Bell Flynn
Virginia is a partner in the firm’s Consumer Financial Services practice and specifically within the Financial Services Litigation practice. She represents clients in federal and state court, both at the trial and appellate level in the areas of complex litigation and business disputes…

Read more about Virginia Bell FlynnVirginia Bell's Linkedin Profile
Show more
Photo of Chad R. Fuller
Chad R. Fuller
Chad is a partner in the firm’s Consumer Financial Services practice with a primary focus in financial services litigation. He is an accomplished trial attorney who has served as lead counsel in state and federal courts across the country in which he