defamation internet discussion board

defamation internet discussion board

FindLawCaselawUnited StatesUS 8th Cir.JOHNSON LLC v. ARDENUnited States Court of Appeals,Eighth Circuit. ResetAA Font size: Print ShareThis JOHNSON LLC v. ARDEN Susan JOHNSON; Robert Johnson; Cozy Kittens Cattery LLC, Appellants, v. Elizabeth ARDEN, dba ComplaintsBoard.com; Michelle Reitenger; ComplaintsBoard.com, InMotion Hosting Inc.; Melanie Lowry; Kathleen Heineman, Appellees. No. 09-2601. — August 04, 2010 Before RILEY, Chief Judge,SMITH and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges.1 Susan and Robert Johnson filed a state civil suit making multiple claims against several defendants as a result of allegedly defamatory statements posted on an internet discussion board. The defendants removed the case to federal court. The original complaint included six defendants; however, the Johnsons located and served only InMotion Hosting, Inc. (“InMotion”), Melanie Lowry, and Kathleen Heineman. The district court2 dismissed the claims against InMotion with prejudice, finding that the Communications Decency Act (CDA) of 1996, 47 U.S.C. § 230(c)(1) and (e)(3) protects InMotion. The court dismissed the claims against Lowry and Heineman without prejudice, finding that Lowry and Heineman had insufficient contacts with the State of Missouri to be subjected to personal jurisdiction in Missouri. Finally, the district court set aside a state court default judgment against Lowry under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b). On appeal, the Johnsons argue that the district court erred in dismissing the claims against InMotion, Heineman, and Lowry and erred in setting aside the default judgment against Lowry. For the reasons stated below, we disagree and affirm. FindLawCaselawUnited StatesUS 8th Cir.JOHNSON LLC v. ARDENUnited States Court of Appeals,Eighth Circuit. ResetAA Font size: Print ShareThis JOHNSON LLC v. ARDEN Susan JOHNSON; Robert Johnson; Cozy Kittens Cattery LLC, Appellants, v. Elizabeth ARDEN, dba ComplaintsBoard.com; Michelle Reitenger; ComplaintsBoard.com, InMotion Hosting Inc.; Melanie Lowry; Kathleen Heineman, Appellees. No. 09-2601. — August 04, 2010 Before RILEY, Chief Judge,SMITH and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges.1 Susan and Robert Johnson filed a state civil suit making multiple claims against several defendants as a result of allegedly defamatory statements posted on an internet discussion board. The defendants removed the case to federal court. The original complaint included six defendants; however, the Johnsons located and served only InMotion Hosting, Inc. (“InMotion”), Melanie Lowry, and Kathleen Heineman. The district court2 dismissed the claims against InMotion with prejudice, finding that the Communications Decency Act (CDA) of 1996, 47 U.S.C. § 230(c)(1) and (e)(3) protects InMotion. The court dismissed the claims against Lowry and Heineman without prejudice, finding that Lowry and Heineman had insufficient contacts with the State of Missouri to be subjected to personal jurisdiction in Missouri. Finally, the district court set aside a state court default judgment against Lowry under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b). On appeal, the Johnsons argue that the district court erred in dismissing the claims against InMotion, Heineman, and Lowry and erred in setting aside the default judgment against Lowry. For the reasons stated below, we disagree and affirm.