July 6, 2022

Volume XII, Number 187

Advertisement
Advertisement

July 06, 2022

Subscribe to Latest Legal News and Analysis

July 05, 2022

Subscribe to Latest Legal News and Analysis

Potential Pitfall in Pre-Action Discovery Revealed in Texas

Texas, like five other states, allows for pre-action discovery to discover the potential wrongdoers in an articulated claim. Rule 202 of the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure authorizes a pre-suit deposition to investigate a potential claim. In In re John Doe a/k/a "Trooper", No. 13-0073 (2014), the Texas Supreme Court considered a situation where an anonymous blogger launched an on-line attack of a company that develops and markets software for use by auto dealerships and its CEO. The CEO lives in Houston and the Company has an office in Texas. The blog post included highly critical commentary about the company, its products and the CEO. The Company filed a Rule 202 petition, noting that they anticipated a suit against the blogger for alleged libel, business disparagement and breach of fiduciary duty. In the petition, the deposition of the service provider that hosted the blog was sought and further requested that the service provider disclose the name, address and telephone number of the owner of the blog and the email address listed on the blog. Appearing anonymously through counsel as "John Doe," the blogger moved to quash the petition for lack of personal jurisdiction, asserting his only contact with Texas is that his blog is available to be read in that state.

The court noted that it must have jurisdiction over not only the respondent (the party whose deposition is sought), but also over the subject of the pre-suit investigation about whom the respondent is expected to be deposed. The court found that Rule 202 does not guarantee access to information where the potential defendant's identity is unknown and where the defendant may reside outside of Texas, even if the information is located in Texas. A proper court must implicitly have subject matter jurisdiction, but also must have personal jurisdiction over the potential defendant, even an anonymous one. "[T]he burden is on the plaintiff in an action to plead allegations showing personal jurisdiction over the defendant" and "[t]he same burden should be on a potential plaintiff under Rule 202."

At the moment limited to Texas, there is a significant burden to obtain pre-suit discovery by initially pleading personal jurisdiction not only over the proposed respondent, but also over the ultimate subject of the investigation. Watch for other states to adopt this reasoning.

© Horwood Marcus & Berk Chartered 2022. All Rights Reserved.National Law Review, Volume IV, Number 352
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement

About this Author

Rick Rein, Creditor's Rights Attorney, Horwood Marcus & Berk Law Firm
Partner

RICK REIN is chair of Horwood Marcus & Berk's Litigation Group and focuses his practice on creditor's rights, loan enforcement and creditor bankruptcy representation. He regularly advises secured creditors in workout and restructuring transactions, including forbearance agreements. He also assists secured creditors in recovering pledged collateral through Uniform Commercial Code sales and commercial mortgage foreclosures, in prosecuting claims based on fraud, non-performing loans, intercreditor disputes and loan commitment litigation and in defending creditors...

312-606-3227
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement