Jobe v. ATR Marketing, Inc.

Citation87 F.3d 751
Decision Date11 July 1996
Docket NumberD,A-,No. 95-60332,95-60332
PartiesTony B. JOBE, Assignee of Air New Orleans, Inc., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. ATR MARKETING, INC.; Avions De Transport Regional, (G.I.E.); Aerospatiale, S.N.I.; Finmeccanica S.p.A., Individually and d/b/a Alenia (a division of Finmeccanica) a/k/a Aeritalia S.p.A. and the successor in the Interest of Aeritalia; Aerospatiale, Inc.; Defendantsefendants-Appellees.
CourtUnited States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (5th Circuit)

George Frazier, Lemle & Kelleher, New Orleans, LA, Wayne E. Ferrell, Jr., Jackson, MS, Orvis A. Shiyou, Jr., Hattiesburg, MS, Terry O'Reilly, O'Reilly & Collins, Menlo Park, CA, Frank D. Montague, Jr., Montague, Pittman & Varnado, Hattiesburg, MS, for plaintiff-appellant.

Erik M. Lowrey, Hattiesburg, MS, George W. Miller, James J. Moore, Sten A. Jensen, Hogan & Hartson, Washington, DC, for defendants-appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi.

Before JOLLY, DUHE and STEWART, Circuit Judges.

E. GRADY JOLLY, Circuit Judge:

The question before us on appeal is whether the district court erred in dismissing this diversity case for lack of personal jurisdiction under Mississippi's long-arm statute. Finding no error, we affirm.

I

Tony B. Jobe, former president and assignee in bankruptcy of Air New Orleans, Inc. ("ANO"), a now defunct commuter airline, brought this breach of contract and tort action in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi on behalf of ANO's bankrupt estate. Jobe sued a group of ANO's former business collaborators, all of whom are nonresidents of the state of Mississippi. The defendant group includes: ATR Marketing, Inc. ("ATR"), a District of Columbia corporation; Aerospatiale, S.N.I., a French corporation; Aerospatiale, Inc., a New York corporation; Finmeccanica, S.p.A., an Italian corporation; and Avions de Transport Regional (G.I.E.), a group organized under the laws of France. Jobe, a Louisiana resident, alleges in his amended complaint that the defendants intentionally negotiated in bad faith to sell six commuter airplanes to ANO. Instead of consummating the sale with ANO, Jobe contends that the defendants breached their agreement with ANO and sold a fleet of approximately fifty aircraft to Continental Airlines. In addition, Jobe alleges that ANO relied to its detriment on the defendants' false representations, that the defendants disclosed confidential information to Continental Airlines, and that the defendants' tortious conduct led to ANO's financial demise. In January 1988, ANO filed for bankruptcy protection in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana. Months after filing its bankruptcy petition, ANO began renting operations and maintenance facilities at the Gulfport, Mississippi airport in May 1988. According to Jobe's sworn affidavit, all of ANO's postpetition operations, including its business in Mississippi, ceased by June 1988. ANO's estate is currently involved in Chapter 7 bankruptcy proceedings.

After Jobe filed this action in Mississippi, the district court ordered that discovery should be limited to the jurisdictional issue and subsequently dismissed Jobe's complaint for lack of personal jurisdiction. The district court found that Jobe was not a Mississippi resident, that the alleged torts did not take place in whole or in part in Mississippi and that no part of Mississippi's long-arm statute 1 could be construed to confer jurisdiction over the nonresident defendants.

On appeal, Jobe relies solely on the "tort-prong" of Mississippi's long-arm statute to support his contention that personal jurisdiction over these defendants is proper. The statute's tort-prong provides for personal jurisdiction over any nonresident who commits a tort in whole or in part within the state of Mississippi against a resident or nonresident of the state. Miss.Code Ann. § 13-3-57 (Supp.1995).

II

We review de novo a dismissal for lack of personal jurisdiction pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(2). Kevlin Servs., Inc. v. Lexington State Bank, 46 F.3d 13, 14 (5th Cir.1995). When a nonresident defendant moves to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction, the plaintiff bears the burden of establishing the district court's jurisdiction over the nonresident. Wilson v. Belin, 20 F.3d 644, 648 (5th Cir.1994). In determining whether personal jurisdiction exists, the trial court is not restricted to a review of the plaintiff's pleadings. It may, as the district court did in this case, determine the jurisdictional issue by receiving affidavits, interrogatories, depositions, oral testimony, or any combination of the recognized methods of discovery. Colwell Realty Investments v. Triple T. Inns of Arizona, 785 F.2d 1330 (5th Cir.1986).

In a federal diversity suit, the reach of federal jurisdiction over nonresident defendants is measured by a two-step inquiry. Smith v. DeWalt Products Corp., 743 F.2d 277, 278 (1984). First, the law of the forum state must provide for the assertion of such jurisdiction; and, second, the exercise of jurisdiction under state law must comport with the dictates of the Fourteenth Amendment Due Process Clause. Id. However, if Mississippi law does not provide for the assertion of personal jurisdiction over the defendants, it follows that we need not consider the due process issue. Id.; Cycles, Ltd. v. W.J. Digby, Inc., 889 F.2d 612, 616 (5th Cir.1989).

In construing the tort-prong of Mississippi's long-arm statute, the Mississippi Supreme Court has held that personal jurisdiction over a defendant who allegedly committed a tort is proper if any of the elements of the tort--or any part of an element--takes place in Mississippi. Smith v. Temco, Inc., 252 So.2d 212 (Miss.1971). Although the specific elements of a particular tort will vary, the conventional tort elements in a negligence action are duty, breach of duty, proximate causation and injury. 2 Palmer v. Anderson Infirmary Benevolent Ass'n., 656 So.2d 790, 794 (Miss.1995). A tort is complete when, and personal jurisdiction lies where, the actual injury occurs. Smith v. Temco, 252 So.2d at 216; see also Rittenhouse v. Mabry, 832 F.2d 1380, 1384 (5th Cir.1987). In determining where the injury occurred for jurisdictional purposes, actual injury must be distinguished from its resultant consequences, such as pain and suffering, economic effects or other collateral consequences that often stem from the actual injury. Recognizing that such collateral consequences may be far-reaching (particularly in a commercial tort situation such as the one before us), our precedent holds that consequences stemming from the actual tort injury do not confer personal jurisdiction at the site or sites where such consequences happen to occur. 3 Cycles, 889 F.2d at 619 (tort of conversion did not take place in whole or in part in Mississippi, even though the plaintiff may have suffered economic consequences in Mississippi); Rittenhouse, 832 F.2d at 1384 (plaintiff's continuing pain and discomfort suffered in Mississippi following her return to the state did not qualify as a tortious occurrence in Mississippi); Estate of Portnoy v. Cessna Aircraft Co., 730 F.2d 286, 290 (5th Cir.1984) (in construing Mississippi's long-arm statute, court held that a tort occurs when and where the actual injury or accident takes place, but does not occur at the site of the economic consequences of that injury); see also Prejean v. Sonatrach, Inc., 652 F.2d 1260, 1270 (5th Cir.1981).

III

Focusing on the site of ANO's alleged injuries and damages, 4 Jobe argues that the nonresident defendants in this case are subject to long-arm jurisdiction because they committed torts, at least in part, within the state of Mississippi. Jobe claims that the defendants were responsible for the following tortious conduct, which resulted in damages being...

To continue reading

Request your trial
125 cases
  • Doddy v. Oxy USA, Inc., 95-21023
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Fifth Circuit
    • December 18, 1996
    ...Procedure. We review de novo a district court's granting of a motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction. Jobe v. ATR Marketing, Inc., 87 F.3d 751, 753 (5th Cir.1996). Occidental moved to dismiss the Doddys' claims against it for lack of personal jurisdiction. The court granted the......
  • Quintel Tech. Ltd. v. Huawei Techs. United States, Inc.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Texas
    • September 27, 2016
    ...depositions, or any other appropriate method of discovery. Wilson v. Belin, 20 F.3d 644, 648 (5th Cir. 1994); see Jobe v. ATR Mktg., Inc., 87 F.3d 751, 752 (5th Cir. 1996). A court may grant jurisdictional discovery when the plaintiff makes a preliminary showing of jurisdiction. See Fieldin......
  • Tatung Co. v. Shu Tze Hsu
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Central District of California
    • September 2, 2014
    ...is necessary that the Houng Family Movants expressly aimed their conduct at California.Movants also argue, citing Jobe v. ATR Marketing, Inc., 87 F.3d 751, 754 (5th Cir.1996), that the harms caused in California are merely “collateral consequences” stemming from the actual injury. Mot. at 1......
  • Tatung Co. v. Hsu, Case No. SACV 13–1743–DOC (ANx).
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Central District of California
    • September 2, 2014
    ...that the Houng Family Movants expressly aimed their conduct at California. Movants also argue, citing Jobe v. ATR Marketing, Inc., 87 F.3d 751, 754 (5th Cir.1996), that the harms caused in California are merely “collateral consequences” stemming from the actual injury. Mot. at 13–14. Howeve......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
1 books & journal articles
  • FORD'S UNDERLYING CONTROVERSY.
    • United States
    • Washington University Law Review Vol. 99 No. 4, April 2022
    • April 1, 2022
    ...(W.D. La. May 13, 2021); Anderson v. Century Prods. Co., 943 F. Supp. 137, 142 (D.N.H. 1996). (172.) See, e.g., Jobe v. ATR Mktg., Inc., 87 F.3d 751, 753 (5th Cir. 1996) ("[Pjersonal jurisdiction lies where ... the actual injury occurs." (citing Smith v. Temco, Inc., 252 So. 2d 212, 216 (Mi......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT