Opinion ID: 2548459
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: jurisdictional facts and proceedings

Text: [¶ 3] On January 7, 2003, Cheyenne Publishing filed a complaint in the district court. In that complaint it is alleged that Cheyenne Publishing is a limited liability company registered and doing business in Wyoming, and that its owners, Larry and Nancy Lovelass, are residents domiciled in Wyoming. Cheyenne Publishing conceded that Starostka is a resident of Nebraska. Cheyenne Publishing asserted that the district court had jurisdiction as provided in Wyo. Const. Art 5, § 10. [1] It also alleged that the complaint was filed within the applicable statute of limitations. Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 1-3-105(a)(v)(A) (libel or slander) (LexisNexis 2003). Cheyenne Publishing alleged that Starostka had certain minimum contacts with Wyoming so as to permit personal jurisdiction. [2] These circumstances were enumerated in the complaint: a) [Starostka] purposefully availing herself of acting in this State as well as directing her activities toward this State and residents of this State and/or ... caused important consequences in this State by such activities; b) the alleged causes of action set forth below arise from [Starostka's] activities and consequences in this State; and c) [Starostka's] activities and consequences of those activities have a substantial connection with this State and this State's exercise of jurisdiction over [her] is reasonable. [¶ 4] Cheyenne Publishing asserted that Starostka entered into a written agreement with Cheyenne Publishing to the effect that Cheyenne Publishing agreed to publish a catalogue that featured, inter alia, Starostka's artwork. [3] Starostka paid Cheyenne Publishing for its services, and Cheyenne Publishing claimed it performed the services set forth in the agreement. [4] Cheyenne Publishing contended that Starostka has contacted and continues to contact numerous individuals, businesses, and agencies in this State and other states via e-mail, internet, telephone and written correspondence in regards to the above agreement and in general about plaintiffs Cheyenne Publishing and Larry and Nancy Lovelass. As a result of Starostka's alleged activities, Cheyenne Publishing contended that it had been defamed, that its contracts with others were interfered with, and that its prospective contractual relationships with others were damaged. The complaint was served on Starostka at her home in Columbus, Nebraska, on January 20, 2003. [¶ 5] On February 19, 2003, Starostka filed a motion to dismiss the complaint for lack of personal jurisdiction. In support of her motion to dismiss, she filed an affidavit with the court that included these assertions: 2. With respect to the allegations contained in the Complaint, and the underlying relationship between the Plaintiffs and me, the first contact I had with any Plaintiff was a telephone call from Nancy Lovelass to me at my home in Columbus, Nebraska. 3. Prior to that phone call, I had never heard of Cheyenne Publishing, LLC, Larry Lovelass, Nancy Lovelass, or the Art Buyers Guide published by the Plaintiffs. 4. In that phone call, Nancy Lovelass offered to sell space in a planned Art Buyers Guide, Volume IX, featuring Nebraska artists, and during that phone call I rejected the solicitation. 5. My next contact with any of the Plaintiffs was a second phone call from Nancy Lovelass to my home in Columbus, Nebraska, again soliciting my purchase of space in the proposed Art Buyers Guide, Volume IX, featuring Nebraska artists. I again advised Nancy Lovelass that I was not interested as I did not have the time, and Nancy assured me that Larry Lovelass would stop by my house and take up no more than 30 minutes of my time. I then agreed to meet with Plaintiff Larry Lovelass at my home in Columbus, Nebraska. 6. My next contact with any of the Plaintiffs was a visit by Larry Lovelass to my home in Columbus, Nebraska, at which time I agreed to purchase space in the Plaintiffs' proposed Art Buyers Guide, Volume IX, featuring Nebraska artists. 7. I never traveled to Wyoming for any purpose related to my purchase of space in the Art Buyers Guide, Volume IX, featuring Nebraska artists. 8. When problems or questions arose, I contacted or attempted to contact Plaintiffs by way of a toll-free number, and, on at least two occasions, return phone calls to me from Plaintiffs originated from Arizona. 9. I have had discussions with other artists concerning Plaintiffs; however, those artists were from Nebraska, Oklahoma, Arizona, and Montana. I have had no communication with any artist, gallery, or art dealer in Wyoming. Of my contacts with artists in states other than Wyoming, certain of those contacts were initiated by the Plaintiffs and others were initiated by the other artists. 10. The only time I ever sold art in Wyoming was when I was a teenager, in the late 1970's; I sold one painting at that time. 11. I have received no contact from any interested party, other artists, art dealer, or gallery in Wyoming, either as a result of the appearance of my work in the Art Buyers Guide, Volume IX, featuring Nebraska artists, or otherwise. 12. My only communications or contacts with persons in the state of Wyoming, other than the telephone calls to the Plaintiffs, are as follows: a. I wrote to Plaintiffs on June 5, 2002, and a copy of that letter is attached hereto as Exhibit A. b. Upon the request of another artist outside the state of Wyoming, I contacted the Wyoming Attorney General's office to register a complaint of my concerns with what I believed to be misrepresentations by the Plaintiffs as to publication circulation of the Art Buyers Guide, Volume IX, featuring Nebraska artists. [5] c. I contacted my local postmaster to request assistance in determining the number of mailings by Plaintiffs of the Art Buyers Guide, Volume IX, featuring Nebraska artists, and I understand my postmaster contacted the Cheyenne, Wyoming, postmaster to inquire into that issue. 13. I contacted the Mountain States Better Business Bureau to complain about my experiences with the Plaintiffs, but contacted that office in Fort Collins, Colorado; it is my understanding that the Mountain States Better Business Bureau, through its procedures, contacted Plaintiffs by letter. 14. I contacted Plaintiff's printer to inquire concerning the number of copies of the Art Buyers Guide, Volume IX, featuring Nebraska artists that were printed for Plaintiffs, but that printer is located in Tulsa, Oklahoma. 15. I provided materials for inclusion in the Art Buyers Guide to Plaintiffs, who I understand reside and conduct business in Wyoming. 16. Other than as set out above, I have had no communications with Plaintiffs or others concerning my dispute with the Plaintiffs over the publication of the Art Buyers Guide, Volume IX, featuring Nebraska artists, and I have otherwise had absolutely no contacts with the state of Wyoming. [¶ 6] In a letter dated June 5, 2002 (the exhibit A mentioned above), Starostka communicated this to Cheyenne Publishing: I am writing this letter to inform you of my demands as an advertising artist in the Art Buyers Guide, Volume IX, featuring Nebraska artists. I give you the option of meeting these demands by June 12, 2002 by 5:00 p.m. (cst). 1. Cheyenne Publishing, LLC, is to provide me with a postal report and receipt to verify that the Art Buyers Guide, Volume IX, featuring Nebraska artists was distributed in May, 2002 from Cheyenne, Wyoming, as specified via my phone conversation with Nancy Lovelass on June 4, 2002, 11:00 a.m. (cst). 2. If a postal report and receipt are not provided to me to verify that the Art Buyers Guide, Volume IX, the Nebraska edition was distributed in May, 2002 from Cheyenne, Wyoming, I demand the return of my money for the $1995.00 plus $165.00 that was paid for the publication and the distribution service. [¶ 7] On March 10, 2003, Cheyenne Publishing filed a response to the motion to dismiss asserting that its complaint was sufficient, [h]owever, there are additional jurisdictional facts that can and need to be developed via the discovery process. Cheyenne Publishing asked that the district court deny the motion to dismiss or, in the alternative, grant further time to conduct discovery. Both sides submitted written arguments to the district court, and by order entered on April 25, 2003, the motion to dismiss was set for hearing on May 22, 2003. Cheyenne Publishing's traverse to the motion to dismiss included a copy of a letter it sent to Starostka under the date of August 9, 2002: The purpose of this letter is to follow-up on our conversation of July 18, 2002 regarding your dispute with my client, Cheyenne Publishing, LLC. My goal was to try to resolve what at best was a consumer complaint. I informed you that I wanted to avoid an adversarial dispute as the cost of litigation alone would shadow any money at dispute. I understood that you would at least give compromise a chance; however, your behavior since our conversation indicates compromise is your last wish. Initially, I indicated that your actions of contacting other artists, publishers, and print shops might be considered defamatory. Since our conversation, you have contacted additional individuals and businesses, and in some instances, you have misrepresented yourself in order to obtain information. Such acts are irrational in light of the alleged dispute. In short, you destroyed any hope of compromise and have crossed the line into defamation. I attempted to warn you of the consequences of your actions. My last bit of advice is for you to seek legal counsel. You shall immediately cease and desist your injurious actions or be held accountable. [¶ 8] On May 7, 2003, Larry Lovelass submitted an affidavit enumerating 17 entities or individuals that had received copies of the disputed art guide. He did not contest any of the assertions made by Starostka in her affidavit. [¶ 9] The district court conducted a 30-minute hearing on May 22, 2003. At the hearing counsel for the parties presented argument, but no evidence was adduced or taken by the district court. Counsel for Cheyenne Publishing did concede that Starostka had not come to Wyoming. Counsel for Cheyenne Publishing also conceded that although it was its contention that Starostka had called into Wyoming on three or four occasions with respect to this dispute, it did not get that fact reduced to an affidavit. Cheyenne Publishing also conceded that the phone calls or other contacts with third parties that were alleged to be defamatory, or otherwise adversely affected its contractual or business interests, were made from Nebraska to persons in states other than Wyoming, but that none were made to Wyoming. The only direct contacts alleged by Cheyenne Publishing were calls she made to Cheyenne Publishing itself, and the fact that she mailed the materials for publication to Cheyenne Publishing in Wyoming. Counsel for Cheyenne Publishing also conceded that its case against Starostka depended upon the theory that her actions in Nebraska had consequences in Wyoming, vis-a-vis Cheyenne Publishing, and that was sufficient to invest Wyoming courts with personal jurisdiction over Starostka.