192 So. 3d 966
Miss.2016Background
- Pekin Insurance Company is an Illinois insurer not licensed to sell Mississippi insurance and not party to a Mississippi contract.
- Timothy Hinton died from a treestand accident; his parents (Hintons) sued C&S Global Imports and The Sportsman’s Guide in Jones County Circuit Court.
- Pekin, as insurer for C&S Global Imports, declined a defense and raised a treestand exclusion in Illinois declaratory action.
- Pekin filed a declaratory action in Illinois and separately filed a declaratory action in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi.
- Two months later, Hintons amended the wrongful-death suit to include Pekin and added related claims, including a misrepresentation tort claim.
- The Jones County Circuit Court denied Pekin’s motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction and held Pekin had sufficient contacts; Pekin appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Does Pekin waive lack of personal jurisdiction by filing in Mississippi? | Hintons: Pekin impliedly consented by suing in Mississippi for the same policy. | Pekin: no waiver under long-arm statute; federal filing is not consent. | Yes; Pekin waived and court affirmed denial of dismissal. |
| Is implied consent established under Interpole-type rule? | Hintons: Interpole rule applies, giving jurisdiction when second suit involves same facts. | Pekin: Interpole does not apply or is distinguishable. | Implied consent applies; consent provides independent jurisdiction basis. |
| Is the long-arm statute analysis unnecessary where implied consent exists? | Hintons: consent abrogates need for long-arm analysis for related claims. | Pekin: long-arm statute still relevant for other bases. | Long-arm analysis unnecessary; consent governs for the related claims. |
Key Cases Cited
- Interpole, Inc. v. Gen. Poles & Fiber Co., 940 F.2d 20 (1st Cir. 1991) (affirmative-relief (implied consent) rule avoids long-arm analysis)
- Marron v. Whitney Group, 662 F. Supp. 2d 198 (D. Mass. 2009) (consent by filing related suit grants jurisdiction independently)
- Praetorian Specialty Ins. Co. v. Auguillard Construction Co., Inc., 829 F. Supp. 2d 456 (W.D. La. 2010) (recognizes affirmative-relief consent to jurisdiction)
- Dow Chem. Co. v. Calderon, 422 F.3d 827 (9th Cir. 2005) (consent-based jurisdiction sovereign over traditional analysis)
- Burger King Corp. v. Rudzewicz, 471 U.S. 462 (1985) (due process limits on jurisdiction; purposeful availment)
- Keeton v. Hustler Magazine, Inc., 465 U.S. 770 (1984) (standard for personal jurisdiction against nonresidents)