Alison Maynard v. William R. Lucero, et al.

Three substantial questions of federal law are presented, each requiring construction of the Wiretap Act, 18 U.S.C. Sec. 2520, incorporating by reference Secs. 2511 and2515, in particular that this federal law preempts state judicial rules in conflict with it, as follows: A. Whether Messrs. Lucero and Vos, nonresidents of Texas, can be dismissed by the Texas court for lack of personal jurisdiction, when nationwide jurisdiction is necessarily implied or the Wiretap Act’s remedy is vitiated; B. Whether the Fifth Amendment’s minimum contacts test, as opposed to the Fourteenth Amendment’s, applies to defendants sued in state court in a federal question case, specifically Lucero and Vos, in this case, for their violations of the Wiretap Act; C. Whether Mr. Bankston’s affirmative defense of statute of limitations can imply the same time limit to service of process, when no limitation on time of service is expressed in the Wiretap Act, nor even in any published state court rule; and whether the Texas Citizens’ Participation Act, which is the basis for that and other defenses raised by Mr. Bankston but not decided on appeal, is preempted in its entirety.