| Keeton v. Hustler | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Supreme Court of the United States |
||||||
| Decided March 20, 1984 | ||||||
| Full case name | Keeton v. Hustler Magazine, Inc. | |||||
| Citations | 465 U.S. 770 (more) 465 U.S. 770 (1984) |
|||||
| Holding | ||||||
| A state's courts could assert personal jurisdiction over the publisher of a defamatory article, where the publisher circulated the publication in the state where the case was brought, regardless of the plaintiff's home state. | ||||||
| Court membership | ||||||
|
||||||
| Case opinions | ||||||
| Majority | Rehnquist, joined by unanimous | |||||
| Concurrence | Brennan | |||||
| Laws applied | ||||||
| U.S. Const., amend. XIV | ||||||
Keeton v. Hustler Magazine, Inc., 465 U.S. 770 (1984)[1], was a case in which the United States Supreme Court held that a state could assert personal jurisdiction over the publisher of a national magazine which published an allegedly defamous article about a resident of another state, and where the magazine had wide circulation in that state.
Contents |
Keeton was a case for defamation brought by a New York resident against the Nation-wide Hustler Magazine. The plaintiff chose to bring the case in New Hampshire, even though the plaintiff was not a resident there, because New Hampshire allowed six-years to bring suit under that state's statute of limitations, which is longer than any other state. Also, New Hampshire's "Single Publication Rule" could increase the amount of damages the plaintiff could collect by accounting for publication in all 50 states.
The issue was whether the federal court had personal jurisdiction if the case was brought in New Hampshire, by a plaintiff from a foreign state against a nationally circulated magazine.
The U.S. Supreme Court upheld personal jurisdiction, stating that the plaintiff in a case had never been required to have "minimum contacts" in a state to bring suit in that state and since the magazine did conduct business within the state of New Hampshire.
This case was decided at the same time as Calder v. Jones, which held that a state had personal jurisdiction over author or editor of an article published in a magazine widely circulated in the state the case was brought, if the claim brought was that the article was libelous about activities in the state by a resident of state. Like Keeton, Rehnquist authored a unanimous decision there. However, a key difference between the cases was that Calder involved a plaintiff suing in her state of residence.