A recent case in the Appellate Division, First Department, dealt with an age old and  fundamental issue: personal jurisdiction.  However, it did so in the context of a very modern medium: information on a website.

In Minella v. Restifo, medical malpractice was alleged against defendant, Dr. Richard J. Restifo arising out of treatment provided in Connecticut.  The doctor was licensed to practice medicine in Connecticut, not New York.  But he was associated with a Connecticut medical facility that maintained a website that included a New York office and telephone number.  The New York telephone number and address referred to the defendant’s associate, Dr. Neil Gordon, a practicing New York physician.

After the plaintiff filed suit, Dr. Restifo filed a motion to dismiss the case alleging he is not subject to personal jurisdiction within New York.  The Supreme Court found he was.

The question of personal jurisdiction centered on New York’s long arm statute, which confers jurisdiction on a defendant who “transacts any business within” New York State or who “contracts anywhere to supply goods or services in the state.”

After a review of the record, the issue the Appellate Division tackled was whether the listing of a New York office and telephone number on a website, without more, was  enough to confer personal jurisdiction in New York.  In its decision, the Appellate Division disagreed with the Supreme Court’s findings and held that the website merely “imparted information” and did not qualify as a business transaction within New York.

The Court’s decision also affirmatively found that the defendant’s association with a New York physician, Dr. Neil Gordon, did not impart personal jurisdiction over the defendant.

Thanks to George Parpas for his contribution to this post.  Please write to Mike Bono for more information.