Rockwood Select Asset Fund XI (6)-1, LLC v. Devine, Millimet & Branch
2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 8460
| 10th Cir. | 2014Background
- Rockwood Select Asset Fund XI (Utah LLC) sought a loan and required a New Hampshire law firm, Devine, Millimet & Branch, to provide a closing opinion letter.
- Devine prepared the opinion letter; someone (Todd Enright) picked it up in New Hampshire and forwarded it to Rockwood’s owner in Utah.
- Rockwood alleged the opinion letter contained falsehoods, sued Devine in Utah federal court, and the district court dismissed for lack of personal jurisdiction.
- Rockwood alleged Devine knew Rockwood was a Utah entity, addressed the opinion letter to a Utah location, and spoke by telephone with Rockwood’s Utah-based owner who made the loan decision.
- The Tenth Circuit reviewed de novo, treating plaintiff’s plausible allegations as true for a prima facie showing of jurisdiction.
- The court held Devine’s contacts with Utah were insufficient to establish specific personal jurisdiction and affirmed dismissal.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Utah courts may exercise specific jurisdiction based on Devine’s interaction with a plaintiff having strong Utah ties | Devine knew Rockwood was a Utah LLC and that Rockwood’s owner (in Utah) would decide the loan; those contacts permit jurisdiction | Under Walden, a defendant’s conduct toward a plaintiff with forum connections does not establish jurisdiction absent defendant’s own forum-directed contacts | Walden controls: plaintiff’s forum contacts alone cannot supply the defendant’s contacts with the forum; jurisdiction denied |
| Whether issuance of an opinion letter addressed to a Utah location and a phone call with Rockwood’s Utah-based owner establish specific jurisdiction | Devine addressed the opinion letter to a Utah address and spoke with Rockwood’s owner while he was in Utah, so its conduct was directed at Utah | Trierweiler forecloses jurisdiction based on an out-of-forum law firm’s opinion letter and a phone call, even if the firm knew the letter would reach the forum | Trierweiler controls: sending an opinion letter and a phone call do not create sufficient forum contacts; jurisdiction denied |
Key Cases Cited
- Walden v. Fiore, 134 S. Ct. 1115 (2014) (a defendant’s knowledge of a plaintiff’s forum connections does not alone establish personal jurisdiction in that forum)
- Trierweiler v. Croxton & Trench Holding Corp., 90 F.3d 1523 (10th Cir. 1996) (opinion letters and isolated phone contact with forum-based decisionmakers do not establish specific jurisdiction)
- Dudnikov v. Chalk & Vermilion Fine Arts, Inc., 514 F.3d 1063 (10th Cir. 2008) (standard for reviewing prima facie personal jurisdiction based on plaintiff’s allegations)