The Longer Arm of Mississippi's Alienation of Affection Law

Posted on Thursday, March 24, 2011

2 Comments

A recent Mississippi Supreme Court opinion makes it easier for plaintiffs to pursue alienation of affection suits against people who live outside of Mississippi, even if the adulterous relationship occurred in another state.  In the Knight v. Woodfield case, Eric Woodfield and his wife, Dokka, lived in Long Beach, Misissippi.  During the parties' marriage, Dokka commuted from her home in Harrison County, Mississippi to her job in Louisiana.

In January 2007, Eric noticed a substantial change in his marital relationship with Dokka.  He noticed that his wife was very protective of her cell phone, that she wouldn't answer text messages around him, and that she used the computer for long periods of time when she thought he was asleep.  Eric obtained Dokka's cell phone and found text messages his wife sent to her coworker, William Knight, who lived in Louisiana.  Eric found that Dokka and William had exchanged 131 text messages and talked for 120 minutes in the month of February 2007 alone.  The phone contained  partially nude photos of Dokka which had been sent to William.  In March 2007, Dokka spoke with William for 860 minutes and the two exchanged 807 text messages.  William admitted that he knew Dokka was married and that she lived with Eric in Mississippi.  William claimed that he and Dokka were never together in Mississippi while she was married to Eric.  

Dokka and Eric separated and Dokka moved to Louisiana. After her divorce from Eric, Dokka married William.  Eric filed a complaint for alienation of affection against William.

William attempted to have the case dismissed, arguing that the Harrison County, Mississippi court did not have jurisdiction over the case.  The trial court denied the request and William appealed to the Mississippi Supreme Court. 

On appeal, Eric argued that William's actions of texting, calling, and emailing Dokka in Mississippi were the cause of the alienation of his wife's affection.  The Mississippi Supreme Court found that the jurisdictional long arm statute was satisfied.  The court also considered whether William had sufficient minimum contacts with Mississippi for purposes of the Due Process Clause of the United States Constitution.  The court found that William's emails, phone calls, and text messages were sufficient minimum contacts:  William purposefully directed his actions at a resident of Mississippi and the suit arose from William's actions.  Finally, the appellate court determined that the lawsuit would not "offend traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice."      

The Mississippi Supreme Court in the Knight case placed considerable emphasis on the fact that Louisiana does not recognize the tort of alienation of affection.  But even so, the court extended the reach of Mississippi law to cases where a person from another state interferes with a Mississippi marriage, even if the relationship occurred outside our state, and the only "presence" the defendant has in Mississippi is by phone, text message, or email.  This case shows that the tort of alienation of affection is definitely alive and well in Mississippi, and the law now reaches farther across state lines than ever before.

By:  Jeremy P. McNinch

2 Comments

Leave A Reply