Francesca Munne Nordness v. Paige Faucheux, 170 So. 3d 454

Paige Faucheux (plaintiff) sued Francesca Munne Nordness (defendant), a nonresident, in Mississippi for alienation of affections and related torts after Phillip Faucheux’s extramarital affair with Nordness contributed to the marriage’s end.
Phillip lived and worked near Memphis, Mississippi; much of the affair occurred in other states (Louisiana, North Carolina, Florida, Nevada, Colorado); Nordness never knowingly communicated with Phillip while he was in Mississippi and never visited Mississippi.
Communications between Phillip and Nordness included calls, texts, emails, and occasional FedEx packages (with a Memphis return address). Nordness later moved to North Carolina and then Tennessee.
Nordness moved to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction. The trial court denied the motion; Nordness obtained interlocutory review.
The Mississippi Supreme Court considered whether Mississippi’s long-arm statute could reach Nordness and, if so, whether exercising jurisdiction would satisfy federal due process (minimum contacts / fair play and substantial justice).

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Mississippi's long-arm statute applies to Nordness	Paige: tort (alienation) injured in Mississippi, so long-arm reaches a nonresident who caused injury here	Nordness: she did not commit acts in Mississippi or purposefully direct activities to Mississippi	Court: Long-arm statute language is broad enough (tort committed in Mississippi), but statute alone is not dispositive because of due process limits
Whether exercising specific personal jurisdiction satisfies Fourteenth Amendment due process	Paige: Nordness purposefully directed communications at Phillip (a Mississippi resident) and injury occurred in Mississippi; jurisdiction is reasonable	Nordness: she lacked purposeful minimum contacts with Mississippi, unaware Phillip lived there, communications were not aimed at Mississippi	Court: Reversed — Paige failed to show Nordness purposefully established minimum contacts with Mississippi; due process forbids jurisdiction; dismissal rendered

Int’l Shoe Co. v. Washington, 326 U.S. 310 (establishing the minimum-contacts standard for personal jurisdiction)
World-Wide Volkswagen Corp. v. Woodson, 444 U.S. 286 (foreseeability of injury in forum alone insufficient for jurisdiction)
Burger King Corp. v. Rudzewicz, 471 U.S. 462 (specific jurisdiction requires purposeful availment or purposeful direction such that defendant should expect to be haled into court)
Walden v. Fiore, 134 S. Ct. 1115 (specific jurisdiction focuses on defendant’s contacts with the forum state itself, not just with forum residents)
Knight v. Woodfield, 50 So.3d 995 (Miss. 2011) (Mississippi precedent finding jurisdiction where nonresident paramour knew partner was a Mississippi resident)