Summary
The United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit reviews the dismissal of Kurt and Janella Stokinger’s New Hampshire-law claims against Armslist, LLC, arising from the alleged facilitation of a firearm sale. The court holds that the evidence concerning Armslist’s website design and its contacts with New Hampshire in 2015 and 2016 did not establish purposeful availment, but that evidence of thousands of New Hampshire listings from 2018 onward could support a prima facie showing when considered with the other evidence. The court therefore affirms in part and vacates in part, leaving the relatedness inquiry and jurisdictional-discovery issues for the district court on remand.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the plaintiffs made a prima facie showing that Armslist purposefully availed itself of the privilege of conducting activities in New Hampshire for purposes of specific personal jurisdiction.
- Whether the district court erred by denying the plaintiffs' request for jurisdictional discovery.
- Whether the First Circuit should decide in the first instance whether the post-2016 New Hampshire contacts were sufficiently related to the plaintiffs' claims and whether exercising jurisdiction was reasonable.
Holdings
- The evidence concerning Armslist's website design, geographic-filtering features, advertising-revenue capability, and contacts existing through 2016 did not establish a prima facie showing of purposeful availment.
- Assuming the post-2016 listings were related to the claims, the evidence that Armslist hosted thousands of firearm listings bearing New Hampshire geographic tags from 2018 onward, considered with the website's design and advertising-revenue evidence, made a prima facie showing of purposeful availment.
- The court declined to decide whether the post-2016 contacts were related to the plaintiffs' claims or whether exercising jurisdiction would be reasonable, leaving those questions for the district court on remand.
- The district court did not abuse its discretion in denying jurisdictional discovery.
Key quotations
“The evidence of the "New Hampshire" listings supplies what is otherwise lacking -- evidence that supportably shows that Armslist knew that "it was intentionally operating its website" for the purpose of facilitating firearm sales in New Hampshire.” (24-27)
“We thus cannot say that the District Court acted in any way improperly in denying the Stokingers' request for jurisdictional discovery.” (37-38)
Factual background
Armslist, a Pennsylvania company, operates an online marketplace for firearms and firearm-related products. The Stokingers alleged that Armslist's website facilitated the sale in New Hampshire of a firearm that was later used to shoot Kurt Stokinger, a former Boston police officer, in Boston in 2016. They relied on the website's design, its geographic-filtering and location-labeling features, advertising revenue, and evidence that thousands of firearm listings bearing New Hampshire geographic tags appeared annually from 2018 onward.
Procedural history
The Stokingers previously sued Armslist in Massachusetts, where the Massachusetts Superior Court dismissed their claims on Communications Decency Act grounds and later dismissed them for lack of personal jurisdiction after jurisdictional discovery. They filed this action in the District of New Hampshire in September 2023, alleging negligence, aiding and abetting tortious and illegal conduct, public nuisance, loss of spousal consortium, and loss of support. The district court denied jurisdictional discovery and dismissed for lack of personal jurisdiction based on failure to show purposeful availment; the First Circuit affirmed in part, vacated in part, and remanded.
Remand instructions
On remand, the district court must address in the first instance whether the post-2016 New Hampshire listings are related to the plaintiffs' claims and whether exercising specific jurisdiction is reasonable. The district court may also address Armslist's alternative grounds for dismissal, including any waiver issues.