Appeals Court Finds Personal Jurisdiction In Tennessee Based on Mean Tweets
Wednesday, November 1st, 2023
Comedian Kathy Griffin has millions of Twitter followers, but not everyone enjoys her tweets. Sometimes she gets sued for the things she says publicly. A recent decision from the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit addressed where she can be sued for her tweets.
In April of 2021, Tennessee resident Samuel Johnson, who is not a celebrity, had an unpleasant interaction with a group of teenagers who were on their way to prom. The conflict happened at a Nashville hotel. Johnson criticized one of the male teenagers for wearing a woman’s dress. Other teenagers responded to Johnson and some of the exchanged was filmed. The minute long clip was posted on-line where it eventually made its way to Kathy Griffin. Kathy Griffin tweeted it to her millions of followers. She identified Johnson, where he lived, and his employer. She demanded that Johnson’s employer VisuWell fire him and remove him from the company’s board of directors. She also tagged the company. VisuWell’s customers threatened to terminate their contracts with VisuWell. As demanded by Kathy Griffin, VisuWell terminated Johnson and removed him from the board of directors.
Johnson sued Griffin in federal court in Nashville, Tennessee, for various tort claims. The trial court dismissed the case for lack of personal jurisdiction over Griffin. Griffin is a California resident with no specific ties to Tennessee. Generally speaking, defendants must be sued in the jurisdiction where they live. However, a defendant can be sued outside their home jurisdiction if they have some connection to the forum state. Tweeting about a person is usually not enough of a connection and Kathy Griffin knows that. She successfully fended off a similar Kentucky lawsuit several years ago based on lack of personal jurisdiction.
But this time, she went too far. Griffin intentionally caused harm in Tennessee by telling her followers where Johnson lived and specifically demanding his employer, a Tennessee company, fire him. Further, she threatened the company with financial harm if it did not. The appeals court determined that these comments were enough to subject Griffin to the jurisdiction of the Tennessee courts.
This was not a decision on the merits. That is to say, the case is not over. Johnson still must win his case. The only issue was whether Kathy Griffin would have to come to Tennessee to defend her tweets in court. And, because the law on jurisdiction by tweet is unsettled nationally, the case could go on to the Supreme Court.
Read the full decision here: Johnson v. Griffin
Kathy Griffin’s previous case on this issue: Blessing v. Chandrasekhar