Ferraro v. Rodgers
7:24-cv-00833
E.D.N.C.May 2, 2025Background
- Plaintiff Antonio Ferraro, a North Carolina resident, sued individual defendants Rodgers, Hall, and McCauley (all residents of Washington state), and Farmasi US, LLC (a Florida corporation), alleging contract and tort claims related to a business dispute involving a company, Audere, Inc., that Ferraro helped found and manage.
- The original complaint included three business entities as plaintiffs, which withdrew after obtaining counsel, leaving Ferraro proceeding pro se.
- Defendants filed motions to dismiss based on lack of personal jurisdiction; Farmasi also challenged service of process.
- The plaintiff moved to strike defendants' affidavits, for leave to amend the complaint, for a preliminary injunction, and to seal certain records preemptively.
- The court considered affidavits and documents submitted by both sides, focusing on whether the defendants’ North Carolina-related activities sufficed for personal jurisdiction.
- The central factual disputes revolved around the defendants' business contacts with North Carolina and whether those contacts related to the alleged torts and breaches in the complaint.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Personal jurisdiction over individuals | Defendants' business dealings and some contacts in NC suffice | No general or specific jurisdiction; contacts unrelated to suit | No personal jurisdiction; dismissed |
| Personal jurisdiction over Farmasi | Farmasi’s distributors and business in NC suffice for general/specific | Insufficient contacts for general or specific jurisdiction | No personal jurisdiction; dismissed |
| Leave to amend complaint | Amended complaint cures jurisdictional deficiencies | Amendment futile—deficiencies remain | Denied as futile |
| Motions to strike affidavits | Affidavits inaccurate/misleading about certain facts | Motions procedurally improper and facts immaterial | Denied |
Key Cases Cited
- Daimler AG v. Bauman, 571 U.S. 117 (2014) (general jurisdiction over individuals or corporations requires domicile or being "at home")
- Universal Leather, LLC v. Koro AR, S.A., 773 F.3d 553 (4th Cir. 2014) (plaintiff's burden for prima facie showing of personal jurisdiction)
- Burger King Corp. v. Rudzewicz, 471 U.S. 462 (1985) (choice-of-law provision does not create personal jurisdiction)
- Walden v. Fiore, 571 U.S. 277 (2014) (effects felt in forum by plaintiff do not alone establish personal jurisdiction)
- Consulting Engineers Corp. v. Geometric Ltd., 561 F.3d 273 (4th Cir. 2009) (factors for specific personal jurisdiction analysis)
- Carefirst of Md., Inc. v. Carefirst Pregnancy Ctrs., Inc., 334 F.3d 390 (4th Cir. 2003) (personal jurisdiction and internet-based conduct)
- BNSF Ry. v. Tyrrell, 581 U.S. 402 (2017) (general jurisdiction for corporate defendants is "exceptional" outside state of incorporation/principal business)