Hi all, I’m not from the US but have a particular burning question related to long-arm statutes and personal jurisdiction in Rhode Island for defamation regarding statements made by government officials about Alex Pretti. For the sake of transparency, I have absolutely no connection to the US government or the Pretti family. I’m just an interested non-US person with a legal background, and an interest in Private International Law.

Why Rhode Island?

In Rhode Island, the RI General Laws § 10-7.1-1, “Liability for damages for libel of a deceased person”, allows actions for libel (or slander) of a deceased person within 3 months of their death, in an obituary or “similar account”, including through television stations. Now, we’ve all no doubt seen the kinds of statements made by White House officials regarding Alex Pretti’s death. Whether they are true or not, I think it’s obvious that such statements would be potentially defamatory if Pretti had survived. He would have a strong case to file for defamation, provided he was alive, in Minnesota.

The rub is that he’s not alive, and in almost every US State, the estate cannot sue for defamation of a deceased’s character. The exception, as above, is Rhode Island.

As not to get too bogged down in the chances of success over such a case (being from out of the US, I’m not sure what protections government officials receive apart from Congresspersons under the Speech and Debate clause), I want to focus just on the conflict-of-laws issues over this approach.

Standing and Personal Jurisdiction

Could Alex Pretti’s family, being nonresidents of Rhode Island, sue eg Kristi Noem for defamation in Rhode Island? She would be a third-party defendant (I think). But as far as I can tell, the purported defamation certainly was communicated to residents in Rhode Island. My reading of the RI long-arm statute suggests this is enough minimal contact to bring her within Rhode Island’s personal jurisdiction.

Forum and Conflict-of-Laws Issues

Now of course, beyond jurisdiction there is a *forum non conveniens* issue, since Rhode Island certainly doesn’t seem to be the most sensible forum for the dispute given neither plaintiff or defendant are residents there. It is forum-shopping, to be sure. So my other question is, would such a dispute ever stand up to that sort of challenge?

And then, with choice-of-law, would Rhode Island actually bother to apply their laws? There is certainly an obvious conflict between the laws of every other state and Rhode Island, they being the odd-ones-out regarding defamation suits for the deceased.

My non– legal-expert argument for both those points is, Rhode Island has an interest in protecting anyone whose defamation occurs in Rhode Island, even for non-residents. This includes their unique laws surrounding defamations of dead people. The forum is not inconvenient; indeed, it is the only proper forum for the action, because it is an action wholly unique to Rhode Island.

Conclusion

Sorry for the longer post full of very technical questions. It’s just a pondering I have, and I figured it’s better to ask the experts here than to try and sort this out on my own without the relevant background. If the answer’s a very obvious “no, why would you think such a stupid strategy would work?”, at least it answers the question!