## Facts

- Sally Ann Nowak, a Massachusetts resident, traveled with her husband to Hong Kong on a trip connected to her employer, a Massachusetts company.
- The defendant, Tak How Investments, Ltd., a Hong Kong corporation, owned and operated a Hong Kong hotel where the Nowaks stayed.
- Over time, the hotel developed an ongoing business relationship with the Massachusetts employer, including repeated communications about reservations and rates.
- The hotel engaged in solicitation and marketing that reached Massachusetts, including direct promotional mailings to the Massachusetts employer and advertising in publications distributed in Massachusetts.
- During the stay, Sally Nowak was found submerged in the hotel pool and died; the estate alleged negligence in the pool’s maintenance and operation.
- The estate sued in federal court in Massachusetts; the defendant moved to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction and, alternatively, forum non conveniens.
- The district court concluded specific personal jurisdiction existed but dismissed on forum non conveniens, conditioned on the defendant’s agreement to litigate in Hong Kong under specified protections.

## Issues

1. Whether Massachusetts courts could exercise specific personal jurisdiction over a Hong Kong hotel operator consistent with the Massachusetts long-arm statute and Due Process Clause, given the hotel’s Massachusetts-directed solicitation and the foreign-location injury.
2. Whether dismissal for forum non conveniens was proper, despite the existence of personal jurisdiction, where the accident, witnesses, and much evidence were in Hong Kong and an adequate alternative forum existed.

## Decision

- The First Circuit held Massachusetts could exercise specific personal jurisdiction over the hotel operator.
- The court applied a three-part specific-jurisdiction inquiry (relatedness, purposeful availment, and reasonableness) and treated relatedness as a flexible requirement in tort cases, satisfied where the forum contacts formed an important link leading to the plaintiff’s presence at the hotel.
- The court affirmed dismissal on forum non conveniens, concluding Hong Kong was an adequate alternative forum and that private and public interest factors favored litigation there.
- The court upheld conditions requiring the defendant to submit to Hong Kong jurisdiction and to mitigate unfairness from limitations or similar defenses tied to the U.S. filing period.

## Legal Principles

- Specific jurisdiction requires (1) relatedness between the claim and forum contacts, (2) purposeful availment, and (3) constitutional reasonableness under the gestalt factors.
- In tort cases, relatedness is not confined to strict proximate causation; a defendant’s forum-directed conduct may suffice when it is a substantial, foreseeable link in the chain of events leading to the injury.
- Purposeful availment may be shown by deliberate, ongoing solicitation and relationship-building with a forum-based customer, making suit in the forum foreseeable.
- Even when personal jurisdiction exists, a court may dismiss for forum non conveniens if an adequate alternative forum is available and the Gulf Oil private/public interest balance strongly favors the foreign forum.
- A domestic plaintiff’s forum choice receives deference, but that deference can be overcome where operative facts, evidence, and key witnesses are concentrated abroad and litigation in the chosen forum would be substantially inefficient or burdensome.

## Conclusion

The First Circuit concluded that targeted, ongoing solicitation of Massachusetts business by a foreign hotel supported specific jurisdiction for a Hong Kong drowning claim, but affirmed dismissal because Hong Kong provided an adequate forum and the convenience and public-interest factors favored adjudication there.


Nowak v. Tak How Invs., Ltd., 94 F.3d 708 (1st Cir. 1996)