On June
3, 2010, the Appellate Court of Illinois affirmed the trial court’s
dismissal for lack of personal jurisdiction in a breach of contract case for a
sale made through eBay. MacNeil v. Trambert, 2010 WL 2222805 (Ill. App. 2 Dist. June 3, 2010). The case started
in November 2008 when the Appellant (“MacNeil” ) purchased a Toyota Land
Cruiser from the Appellee (“Trambert”) on eBay.
After a few emails and phone calls between the parties, the transaction was
completed. Then MacNeil discovered that the vehicle did not have satellite
radio or DVD screens in the
headrest, as advertised in the eBay description.
In February 2009, MacNeil, an
Illinois
resident, filed a claim in the small claims court in
Illinois claiming breach of contract and
damages of $2,546 for the value of the two missing items.
Trambert filed a motion to dismiss contending
that the trial court lacked personal jurisdiction over him, because he did not
have the necessary minimum contacts with
Illinois
to support jurisdiction.
In July 2009 the trial court granted Trambert’s motion to
dismiss holding that, “the mere formation of an on-line contract in the
defendant’s limited e-mail and telephonic correspondence with the Illinois
plaintiff regarding that contract are by themselves insufficient to establish
minimum contacts with Illinois, and the defendant did not purposely direct any
eBay sales specifically toward Illinois residents or use Ebay to establish the
regular business in Illinois.” In the
instant appeal, the appellate court agreed that MacNeil could not establish
general or specific jurisdiction over the Trambert.
The court held that MacNeil could not establish general
jurisdiction because Trambert’s advertisements for the vehicle on eBay alone
were insufficient to show that he had continuous and systematic contacts with Illinois. MacNeil also contended that he established
specific jurisdiction over Trambert because Trambert transacted business in Illinois regarding the
sale of the vehicle. In other words,
Trambert should have anticipated being hailed into court in Illinois regarding that transaction. The court rejected MacNeil’s argument citing a
Northern District of Illinois case that addresses the specific issue of
personal jurisdiction in an eBay auction case.
In Foley v. Yacht
Management Group, Inc., the defendant, a Massachusetts
resident, auctioned a yacht on eBay to the highest bidder, an Illinois resident (plaintiff). The plaintiff sent a deposit after receiving
an email that he was the highest bidder. No.08-C-7254 (N.D.Ill. July 9, 2009). Shortly thereafter, however, the defendant refused to accept the
deposit. The plaintiff filed suit in Illinois for breach of
contract and defendant moved to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction. The court held, in that case, that “a seller
who posts an item on eBay for auction has no control over who ultimately
purchases that item, and therefore the seller does not engage in conduct that
rises to the level of purposeful availment necessary to establish personal
jurisdiction.” The limited emails and
phone calls between defendants and plaintiff were not enough to change the
analysis.
Likewise, in this case, the court held that the eBay
transaction plus the other limited communications between parties was
insufficient to establish personal jurisdiction over the defendant in Illinois. Citing the holding in Foley, the court said that because, “[Foley] is sufficiently analogous and persuasive, we conclude
that Trambert’s contact with Illinois
was random, fortuitous, and attenuated.”
Lastly, MacNeil argued, test applied in Larochelle v. Allamian applies
to establish personal jurisdiction in this case. 361 Ill.App.3d 217, 225 (2005). The test in Larochelle is whether the website is interactive, such that
contracts are completed online and the defendant derives profit from the
web-related activity. However, the court
rejected that argument by distinguishing Larochelle,
which
involved a continuous and intimate business relationship in the forum,
unlike the “one-time deal” transaction that occurred in the instant case.
As a result, the court found that under all of MacNeil’s
contentions, he failed to establish personal jurisdiction over the defendant in
Illinois for
merely conducting a single sale with the plaintiff through eBay.
Photo Credit: Ryan Fanshaw Photography
Comments