P. ROBERT OSBORN, APPELLANT,
v.
THE UNIVERSITY SOCIETY, INC., APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
A Florida court affirmed dismissal of a breach-of-contract action against a non-resident corporation, holding that despite statutory language permitting jurisdiction, the defendant lacked minimum constitutional contacts with Florida necessary to sustain personal jurisdiction.
Although the statutory language of Section 48.193(1)(g) may literally permit jurisdiction, the court lacked constitutional authority to exercise jurisdiction because the defendant lacked minimum contacts with Florida. Executing a contract with a Florida resident to furnish consulting services at an unspecified location is insufficient contact with Florida to predicate jurisdiction.
[1] A breach of contract occurs in Florida for purposes of long-arm jurisdiction when a nonresident defendant fails to perform acts required by the contract to be performed i…
[2] Where a contract is silent as to the place of payment, the debtor must seek the creditor, and the breach occurs where the creditor is domiciled.
Previewing 2 of 5 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“a person is subject to the jurisdiction of the court if he "[breaches a contract in this state by failing to perform acts required by the contract to be performed in this state."”
Statement of the statutory provision under which Osborn sought jurisdiction
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceRobert Osborn, domiciled in Punta Gorda, Florida, entered into a consulting contract with the University Society, Inc., a New York corporation with pr…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Personal Jurisdiction Over Nonresidents cases and more on FLexlaw
GRIMES, Chief Judge.
This is an appeal from an order dismissing a complaint for lack of jurisdiction over the defendant.
Robert Osborn filed the complaint against the University Society, Inc. seeking damages for. its failure to pay him for services under a consulting contract. He alleged that at the time he entered into the contract with the Society he was domiciled in Punta Gorda, that he signed the contract in Punta Gorda, and that although the contract was silent as to the place of payment, the Society had made all payments in Punta Gorda. He also alleged that the Society was a New York corporation with its principal place of business in New Jersey.
Osborn sought to obtain jurisdiction over the Society pursuant to the provisions of Section 48.193(l)(g), Florida Statutes (1977). The Society, however, moved to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction. The court granted the motion, concluding that the allegations of the complaint were insufficient to subject the Society to jurisdiction under the statute.
Section 48.193(l)(g), Florida Statutes (1977), provides that a person is subject to the jurisdiction of the court if he “[breaches a contract in this state by failing to perform acts required by the contract to be performed in this state.” In Madax International Corp. v. Delcher Intercontinental Moving Services, Inc., 342 So. 2d 1082 (Fla.2d DCA 1977), our court in considering the reach of this section stated that where there is an express promise to pay and the contract does not state a place of payment, the debtor must seek the creditor and thus the breach occurs where the creditor is domiciled. In light of the principle announced in Madax, a literal reading of the statute suggests that the court had jurisdiction over the Society in this case.
Nevertheless, in cases involving jurisdiction over nonresidents, there are constitutional issues which we must also consider. A court may acquire personal jurisdiction over a nonresident only if the nonresident has “minimum contacts with [the forum state] such that the maintenance of the suit does not offend ‘traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice.’ ” International Shoe Co. v. Washington, 326 U.S. 310, 316, 66 S.Ct. 154, 158, 90 L.Ed. 95, 102 (1945). Thus, under a given factual situation, even though a nonresident may appear to fall within the wording of a long arm statute, a plaintiff may not constitutionally apply the statute to obtain jurisdiction in the absence of the requisite minimum contacts with the forum state. Harlo Products Corp. v. Case Co., 360 So. 2d 1328 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978); Jack Pickard Dodge, Inc. v. Yarbrough, 352 So. 2d 130 (Fla. 1st DCA 1977).
We find nothing in the complaint which would indicate that the Society was availing itself of the privilege of conducting activities in Florida. The execution of a contract with a Florida resident for him to furnish consulting services at an unspecified location is an insufficient contact with Florida upon which to predicate jurisdiction. In contrast, Madax involved a nonresident defendant who specifically contracted with a Florida moving company to move goods within this state. Accordingly, we hold that the complaint failed to allege sufficient minimum contacts with the State of Florida to justify the acquisition of jurisdiction over the Society. See Lakewood Pipe of Texas, Inc. v. Rubaii, 379 So. 2d 475 (Fla.2d DCA 1979).
AFFIRMED.
SCHEB, J., and RAWLINS, ROBERT W., Jr., Associate Judge, concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (32 total)
-
Venetian Salami Co. v. J.S. Parthenais, 554 So. 2d 499 (Fla. 1989)…1989), because of conflict with Unger v. Publisher Entry Service, Inc., 513 So. 2d 674 (Fla. 5th DCA 1987), review denied, 520 So. 2d 586 (Fla.1988); Scordilis v. Drobnicki, 443 So. 2d 411 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984); and Osborn v. University Society, Inc., 378 So. 2d 873 (Fla.2d DCA 1979). We have jurisdiction under article V, section 3(b)(3), of the Florida Constitution. This case involves the circumstances under which Florida may obtain jurisdiction over a nonresident defendant pursuant to its long-arm statute. B…1 / 2
-
Martin Acquadro, M.D. v. Bergeron, 851 So. 2d 665 (Fla. 2003)…e absence of the requisite minimum contacts with the forum state. Harlo Products Corp. v. Case Co., 360 So. 2d 1328 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978); Jack Pickard Dodge, Inc. v. Yarbrough, 352 So. 2d 130 (Fla. 1st DCA 1977). [Osborn v. University Society, Inc., 378 So. 2d 873, 874 (Fla. 2d DCA 1979).] We approve of the foregoing analyses in [Scordilis v. Drobnicki, 443 So. 2d 411, 412 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984)], [Unger v. Publisher Entry Service, Inc., 513 So. 2d 674, 675 (Fla. 5th DCA 1987) ], and Osborn. The mere proof of a…
-
Engineered Storage Sys., Inc. v. Nat'l Partitions & Interiors, Inc., 415 So. 2d 114 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982)…es where the default occurred which is necessarily the [*115] place where the creditor resides. Williams v. Aeroland Oil Co., 155 Fla. 114, 20 So. 2d 346 (1944); Croker v. Powell, 115 Fla. 733, 156 So. 146 (1934); Osborn v. University Society, Inc., 378 So. 2d 873 (Fla. 2d DCA (1979); Madax International Corporation v. Delcher Intercontinental Moving Services, Inc., 342 So. 2d 1082 (Fla. 2d DCA 1977); Mendez v. George Hunt, Inc., 191 So. 2d 480 (Fla. 4th DCA 1966). Florida courts have jurisdiction over the p…1 / 2
Previewing 3 of 32 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Int'l Shoe Co. v. State OF Wash., 326 U.S. 310 (U.S. 1945)
- Madax Int'l Corp. v. Delcher Intercontinental Moving Servs., Inc., 342 So. 2d 1082 (Fla. 2d DCA 1977)
- Jack Pickard Dodge, Inc. v. Yarbrough, 352 So. 2d 130 (Fla. 1st DCA 1977)
- Harlo Prods. Corp. v. J. I. Case Co., 360 So. 2d 1328 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978)
- State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Birnbaum, 379 So. 2d 475 (Fla. 4th DCA 1980)
- Lakewood Pipe OF Tex., Inc. v. Rubaii, 379 So. 2d 475 (Fla. 2d DCA 1979)