/>iLucas B. Horton is a famous name in TCPA circles.
He has had a number of big wins in TCPA circles– crushing a few defendants for large payouts.
But when he sued PivotHealth a while back he got more than he was counting on.
He lost his case, and then Pivot did something highly unusual– it actually sued him back.
In Pivot’s view Horton had manufactured evidence in the previous case and then dismissed the case to avoid getting caught. Horton claimed that it was Pivot that lied in discovery– resulting in the case being unsustainable.
Regardless Pivot sued Horton for wrongful institution and continuation of civil proceedings and abuse of process related to his lawsuit– and it looks like the case may have some merit.
Specifically, Horton just tried to have case dismissed on jurisdictional grounds and the court said “nope.”
In PivotHealth v. Horton, 2025 WL 1865788 (D. Az July 7, 2025) the Court denied Horton’s motion to throw out the claim on standing and jurisdictional grounds.
The Court found a sufficient injury in fact alleged that was caused by Horton’s conduct and redressible by the court– so Article III case or controversy SMJ was established.
The court also found the case might be worth more than $75k, so diversity jurisdiction was available.
The Court also found personal jurisdiction over Horton– a Texas resident–because he voluntarily transferred the underlying case to Arizona. As such he was fair game to be sued in the state for claims arising out of the lawsuit.
So the Court allowed the case to proceed.
Interestingly, Horton did not challenge the substantive allegations in the complaint– he only challenged jurisdiction and venue– so we will need to wait to see whether the claims can proceed on the merits. If so it opens up the door to counterclaims against many TCPA litigators.
Then again, this case is somewhat unique because of the claim Plaintiff manufactured evidence. That might end up being the determining factor permitting the case to proceed- -and it probably isn’t present in many TCPA suits.
