Long-Arm Statute...not as long as you'd think.

I filed a small claims complaint for a client a few months ago.  The facts are as follows:  He had an on-and-off relationship with a woman for many years.  They met in CA, where she is from, but he is from Boston.  She had some financial difficulties and asked him if he could help her; my client gave her a job in his company out here in Boston.  He flew her out here to have her sign a "signature card" at the bank so she could be a signer on the business account.  In addition, she stated that she needed a new computer and other "stuff" for her to start the new job in his company; he agreed, and spent thousands of dollars.

She flew back to CA with all of her new "stuff," happier than a pig-in-shit.  One week later, she quit before ever doing any actual work, broke up with him, and refused to give back any of the "stuff" my client bought.

A few months later, my client hired me to sue her.  Prior to filing complaint, we had her served by a constable out in CA with a demand letter.  This was to show the court that she did live there, in case she claimed she never received service of the complaint sent from the court.

Fast forward the tape...she had her attorney contact me to say she lost her job, has no money, and would send back the "stuff" if we dropped the suit.  My client advised me to offer the following to the attorney: "If your client will make a substantial charity donation in both her name and my client's name, consider the suit dropped."  After a few days, I received a copy of letter from the defendant addressed to the clerk.  She asked the clerk to dismiss the case for lack of "personal jurisdiction" as she lives in CA and has no contacts here in MA.

The following is the MA "long-arm statute" which allows a plaintiff to bring suit against a defendant in MA when the defendant lives in another state:

Mass. Gen Laws. ch. 223A, § 3A court may exercise personal jurisdiction over a person, who acts directly or by an agent, as to a cause of action in law or equity arising from the person's

(a) transacting any business in this commonwealth;

(b) contracting to supply services or things in this commonwealth;

(c) causing tortious injury by an act or omission in this commonwealth;

(d) causing tortious injury in this commonwealth by an act or omission outside this

commonwealth if he regularly does or solicits business, or engages in any other persistent course of

conduct, or derives substantial revenue from goods used or consumed or services rendered, in this

commonwealth;

(e) having an interest in, using or possessing real property in this commonwealth;

(f) contracting to insure any person, property or risk located within this commonwealth at the

time of contracting;

(g) maintaining a domicile in this commonwealth while a party to a personal or marital

relationship out of which arises a claim for divorce, alimony, property settlement, parentage of a

child, child support or child custody; or the commission of any act giving rise to such a claim; or

(h) having been subject to the exercise of personal jurisdiction of a court of the commonwealth

which has resulted in an order of alimony, custody, child support or property settlement,

notwithstanding the subsequent departure of one of the original parties from the commonwealth, if

the action involves modification of such order or orders and the moving party resides in the

commonwealth, or if the action involves enforcement of such order notwithstanding the domicile of
the moving party.

I received a call from the clerk asking me if I could show there was a reason to utilize the long-arm-statute.  I assured him that I would show the court that the defendant conducted business here in MA under Mass. Gen Laws. ch. 223A, § 3(a).  The clerk hung up after stating he would see me in court.

On the day of trial, I approached the clerk and showed him a copy of my client's sworn affidavit telling his side of the story.  I then showed the clerk the signed bank card, making her a signer on my client's account here in Boston.  I showed the clerk purchases she had made while she was here in Boston.  I showed the clerk many emails between my client and the defendant showing her acceptance to work for a MA company.  I showed the clerk her many flights back and forth form CA to MA, prior to her agreeing to work for my client.

As I presented each piece of evidence, he continued to shake his head back and forth.  He kept interrupting me stating that my client and the defendant had a personal relationship, and that my client absolutely has a case against the defendant, just not here in MA.

At the end of the day, the defendant stole my client's money, broke his heart, and is laughing her ass off that the case was dismissed!!!

I guess the only advice I can give, is to keep this story in mind when filing a complaint against an out of state defendant. 

Craig :-)