Summary
refusing to exercise federal question jurisdiction over claims for libel, invasion of privacy, and intentional infliction of emotional distress
Summary of this case from Bollea v. ClemOpinion
Civil Action No. 3:04-CV-275-H.
December 15, 2004
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on Defendants' motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction, lack of subject matter jurisdiction and incorrect venue. Based upon the absence of Defendants' "continuous and systematic" contacts with Kentucky; Plaintiffs' residence in Florida; and the injury, therefore, having its situs in Florida, the Court has doubts about the presence of personal jurisdiction. However, the Supreme Court has suggested that where the matter of subject matter jurisdiction does not involve an arduous inquiry, district courts are advised to consider that issue first. Ruhrgas AG v. Marathon Oil Company, 526 U.S. 574 (1999). The issue of subject matter jurisdiction here presents such an opportunity. The Court finds no basis for federal question jurisdiction.
I.
Plaintiffs are Jose A. Santos, an award winning thoroughbred jockey, his wife Rita C. Santos, and their son Jose A. Santos, Jr. as well as Sackatoga Stable. On May 3, 2003 Plaintiff Jose A. Santos rode the thoroughbred horse Funny Cide, owned by Plaintiff Sackatoga Stable, to victory in the 129th Kentucky Derby. Jose A. Santos, Rita C. Santos, and their son Jose A. Santos, Jr. are each citizens of Florida. Sackatoga Stable is a partnership licensed to do business in Kentucky but with its principal place of business in Sackets Harbor, New York.
The corporate and individual defendants in this case all have some connection to the daily newspaper The Miami Herald. There are seven individual defendants each of whom is a citizen of Florida and resides in that state. Knight-Ridder and its division the Miami Herald Publishing Company own and publish The Miami Herald.
This lawsuit concerns an article published in The Miami Herald about Jose A. Santos and the 129th running of the Kentucky Derby. The articles raise questions about the jockey's conduct during the race. Plaintiffs allege this article was "false, defamatory and malicious" and caused Plaintiffs harm in and outside of Kentucky.
II.
Both parties agree that this action does not rely on diversity jurisdiction for subject matter jurisdiction. Each of the Defendants and three of the four Plaintiffs are Florida citizens. Absent diversity of citizenship, federal question jurisdiction is required. Caterpillar, Inc. v. Williams, 482 U.S. 386, 392 (1997). Federal district courts have original jurisdiction over "all civil actions arising under the Constitution, laws, or treaties of the United States." 28 U.S.C. § 1331. Federal question jurisdiction exists only where a federal question appears on the face of the complaint. Rivet v. Regions Bank of Louisiana, 522 U.S. 470, 475 (1998).
Plaintiffs contend that their Complaint meets the requirements for federal question jurisdiction. Plaintiffs believe that in addition to some state law claims, they have also pleaded "violations of protections afforded them under the First Amendment, Fourth Amendment and Fourteenth Amendment." Pls. Resp. Defs. Mot. Dismiss 14. A careful reading of Plaintiffs' Complaint, however, reveals no federal question. Libel, invasion of privacy, and intentional infliction of emotional distress all sound in tort. Common law tort claims are wholly unrelated to federal law. McCall v. Courier-Journal and Louisville Times Co., 623 S.W.2d 882, 886-88 (Ky. 1981) (libel and invasion of privacy); Craft v. Rice, 671 S.W.2d 247, 251 (Ky. 1984) (infliction of emotional distress). At conference, counsel could provide no plausible explanation of how this Court might find subject matter jurisdiction. The Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction.
Being otherwise sufficiently advised,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendants' motion to dismiss is SUSTAINED and Plaintiffs claims are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.