New York-based party can be sued in Massachusetts for conduct that caused tortious injury in Massachusetts

Law Reporter, Sep 2002

Darcy v. Hankle, 768 N.E.2d 583 (Mass. App. Ct. 2002).

A Massachusetts appellate court held that a defendant based in New York can be sued in Massachusetts for conduct that caused tortious injuries to a plaintiff in Massachusetts.

Here, Hankle, who owned a company in New York, brought a criminal action against Darcy for allegedly failing to pay a bill. A New York police officer subsequently called Darcy at his home in Massachusetts and threatened to arrest him. The case was eventually dismissed, and Darcy then sued Hankle in Massachusetts for abuse of process and malicious prosecution. The trial court granted defendant's motion to dismiss, holding that plaintiff failed to show that defendant had inflicted an injury on him in Massachusetts.

Reversing, the appellate court noted that Massachusetts permits personal jurisdiction over an out-of-state defendant if the defendant caused tortious injury in Massachusetts and commonly engaged in a course of conduct or business within the state. Here, defendant's criminal complaint against plaintiff caused the New York police to call plaintiff in Massachusetts, a result that defendant likely anticipated. Several injuries-including emotional harm and the loss of a business deal due to missing a meeting-then occurred as a result of defendant's conduct, the court found.

The court rejected defendant's argument that plaintiff only suffered the consequences of a tortious act that was committed in New York. If an out-of-state wrong causes shame, embarrassment, or loss of consortium within a forum state, these injuries constitute the primary tortious injury on which personal jurisdiction may rely, the court explained.

Moreover, defendant established minimum contacts in Massachusetts by selling to customers in Massachusetts and making deliveries to the state. Thus, defendant was conducting business in the state to the extent that he invoked the benefits and protection of Massachusetts laws.

Accordingly, the court remanded the case for further proceedings.

Plaintiff's Counsel

Daniel PL Solin, Pittsfield, Mass.