Colin Cody, a Connecticut resident, invested $200,000 in the common stock of Phillips Company, a firm that installs video gambling machines in Louisiana casinos. Cody brought suit against the defendant, Kevin Ward, a resident of California, alleging that Ward had used an Internet website called “Money Talk” to perpetrate a fraud on potential investors. The gist of Cody’s complaint was that Ward had engaged in false and fraudulent misrepresentations about the Phillips Company’s impending financial prospects. Cody claimed to have made decisions about whether to buy and hold Phillips stock in partial reliance on Ward’s misrepresentations on the Internet and on telephone calls made by Ward that encouraged Cody to buy and hold Phillips stock. Cody further claimed that the Phillips stock was essentially worthless. Ward sought to dismiss the complaint, alleging that he could not be sued in Connecticut because there were insufficient grounds for personal jurisdiction. Cody maintains that a defendant who orally or in writing causes information to enter Connecticut by wire is committing a tortious act within Connecticut and is subject to suit pursuant to the Connecticut long-arm statute. Do you believe that Ward has committed a tortious act within the forum state that would satisfy the requirements of the long-arm statute? Do you believe that there is a constitutional basis for Connecticut to exercise in personam jurisdiction over Ward?