Website Insufficient to Establish Personal Jurisdiction in Hot Diaper Case

On March 25, 2010, the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit affirmed a lower court’s dismissal of a medical malpractice suit for lack of personal jurisdiction.  Cossaboon v. Maine Medical Center, 2010 WL 1078342 (C.A.1 (N.H.)). In June, 2008, Amanda Cossaboon filed a medical malpractice action against the Maine Medical Center (“MMC”) after an employee burnt her newborn daughter’s foot with a hot, wet diaper.Cossaboon filed suit in New Hampshire state court, but MMC removed the action to federal court and subsequently moved to dismiss the action for lack of personal jurisdiction.

The district court held that MMC was not subject to general personal jurisdiction because MMC had not purposefully established “continuous and systematic” contacts with New Hampshire. On appeal, Cossaboon contended that MMC’s “user friendly and interactive website,” (www.mmc.org) was sufficient to establish general personal jurisdiction.  Citing First Circuit precedent, the court wrote, “the mere existence of a website that is visible in a forum and that gives information about a company and its products is not enough, by itself, to subject a defendant to personal jurisdiction in that forum … [s]omething more is necessary, such as interactive features which allow the successful online ordering of the defendant’s products.”  Id. (citing McBee v. Delica Co., 417 F.3d 107, 124 (1st Cir. 2005)).  Cossaboon argued that MMC’s website has interactive features, such as permitting users to make donations, complete patient registration, register for classes, find a doctor, and apply for employment.  However, the court goes further and says that the defendant must “actually and deliberately use its website to conduct commercial transactions or other activities with residents of the forum.”  Id. (citing Coastal Video Commc’ns Corp. v. Staywell Corp., 59 F.Supp.2d 562, 571-72 (E.D. Va. 1999) (finding the “mere existence of an interactive website” insufficient to support general jurisdiction)).  The court found that MMC’s website is primarily informational and does not sell or render services online.

Furthermore, the court noted that the website is available to anyone with Internet access and does not target New Hampshire residents, in particular. The accessibility of the website to residents in New Hampshire falls short of establishing that MMC purposefully availed itself of the opportunity to do business in New Hampshire. As a result, the First Circuit affirmed the district court’s order granting MMC’s motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction.

Photo Credit:  http://www.flickr.com/photos/ingamun/ / CC BY-NC 2.0