Case 5: Internet Solutions Corp. v. Marshall, 611 F.3d 1368 (11^th Cir. 2010) (Mallor 15^th Ed. P. 54)

Internet Solutions Corp. (ISC), a Nevada corporation, has its principal place of business in Orlando, Florida. ISC, which operates various employment recruiting and internet advertising websites, sued Tabatha Marshall, a resident of the State of Washington, in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida. In its lawsuit, ISC alleged that on her website, Marshall made false and defamatory statements asserting that ISC engaged in ongoing criminal activity, scams, and phishing. According to ISC, these statements, which were directed toward Florida residents, caused injury (in excess of $75,000) to ISC's business in Florida. Marshall filed a motion to dismiss the case because, in her view, neither subject matter nor in personal jurisdiction existed.

Please state either true or false for the following statements. It would be appreciated if you could give an explanation to your answer.

1. The federal district court in Florida lacks subject matter jurisdiction over the claim pursued by ISC against Tabatha Marshall.

2. The federal district court in Florida has in personal jurisdiction over Tabatha Marshall, even though she is a resident of the state of Washington and does not do business in Florida.

3. If the state courts of Florida and Washington have in personal jurisdiction by virtue of Florida's long arm statute and her residency in Washington, the federal district court in Florida has concurrent jurisdiction to resolve ISCs claim against Marshall.

4. The federal district court in Florida can claim jurisdiction over Tabatha Marshall by virtue of in rem jurisdiction.

5. If the federal district court in Florida can claim jurisdiction over Tabatha Marshall by virtue of Florida's long arm statute, the federal district in which Marshall's false and defamatory statements were read by ISC's customers will likely be selected as the venue for litigating the dispute.