May It Please the Mozzers,

The world is filled with all kinds of nutty people. Mostly, this is a wonderful thing. But sometimes it's not.

The case I want to discuss today involves two lawyers, a messy breakup, and a blog about "Guns, God, Food, Beer, Tools, Politics, and Whining."

Stephen Hogge, a Florida attorney, operates the blog Hog on Ice. He was sued in California by a former Miami School of Law classmate, Fatima dos Santos Fahmy, over statements he made about her on his blog, including calling her a deadbeat, maligning her work ethic, and falsely claiming that she was Hogge's former girlfriend. To get right to it, he falsely labeled her "a mentally ill alcoholic prostitute." Not surprisingly, Ms Fahmy didn't care for these remarks and tried to put her legal education to good use.

Representing herself, she sued Mr. Hogge on her home court, California.

Generally, if you're bringing a lawsuit you've got to sue the defendant where he lives. It's a basic fairness issue. Now, the fairness equation changes if you can successfully argue that the defendant sought you out in your home state to commit his wrongful acts. Why should you have to sue him over there if he went out of his way to  do something illegal in your state, right?

Mr. Hogge, also representing himself, asked the California court to dismiss the case because the California court has no jurisdiction over Florida residents. This is a standard legal challenge to multi-state jurisdictional issues.

Ms. Fahmy countered by arguing that Mr. Hogge subjected himself to jurisdiction in California by targeting her for his tortious remarks. He targeted her and she lives in California, ergo, California courts should have jurisdiction over Hogge.

Hogge replied by arguing that he didn't know she lived in California, so he couldn't have been targeting California.

At first, the court agreed with Ms. Fahmy. However, the Court later reconsidered and decided to go ahead and dismiss the lawsuit, but not without issuing a bit of a lecture to both parties for their alleged technical blunders in the case. Ms. Fahmy didn't properly authenticate her documents and Mr. Hogge filed over-length briefs. This proves again the old adage, "a lawyer who represents himself has a fool for a client."

Technically, this is a win for bloggers who are now less likely to be subjected to out-of-state suits. However, I can't help but feel this is a loss for exes of nutty bloggers everywhere.

Eric Goldman and The Citizen Media Law Project also cover the case.

Best Regards,
Sarah