LOUIE L. WAINWRIGHT, APPELLANT,
v.
PAN-AM TOBACCO CORPORATION, D/B/A PAN-AM VENDTRONICS, 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.
The court held that the trial court erred in denying the motion to transfer venue, as the cause of action was not exempted from the general venue rule.
Plaintiff brought a breach of contract action against a state official. The defendant moved to transfer the venue to Leon County. The trial court deni…
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 Transfer Of Venue cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Plaintiff-appellee Pan-Am Tobacco Corporation brought an action for breach of contract against “Louie L. Wain[w]right, Secretary and Chief Executive Officer of the STATE OF FLORIDA, DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS.” Defendant-appellant Wainwright moved to transfer the cause to the Second Judicial Circuit in and for Leon County, Florida. The trial judge denied the motion, and this interlocutory appeal is from that order. The order is reversed pursuant to the holding of the Supreme Court of Florida in Carlile v. Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission, 354 So. 2d 362 (Fla.1977). See also Florida Department of Environmental Regulation v. Key Haven Associated Enterprises, Inc., 364 So. 2d 818 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978).
The appellee’s contention that its cause of action is exempted from the rule laid down in Carlile because a Department of Corrections’ official sent a letter terminating the contract to the appellee in Dade County is not tenable. Cf. the facts and law in Department of Revenue v. Arvida Corporation, 315 So. 2d 235 (Fla. 2d DCA 1975). See also Foy v. State Road Department, 166 So. 2d 688 (Fla. 3d DCA 1964).
The. order appealed is reversed and the cause remanded with directions to transfer the cause to the Circuit Court of the Second Judicial Circuit in and for Leon County, Florida.
Reversed and remanded.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (12 total)
-
Kingsley v. Kingsley, 623 So. 2d 780 (Fla. 5th DCA 1993)…y to sue means the absence of a legal disability which would deprive a party of the right to come into court. Keehn v. Joseph C. Mackey & Co., 420 So. 2d 398, 399 n. 1 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982); Argonaut Insurance Co. v. Commercial Standard Insurance Co., 380 So. 2d 1066, 1067 (Fla. 2d DCA), rev. denied, 389 So. 2d 1108 (Fla.1980); General Development Corp. v. Kirk, 251 So. 2d 284, 286 (Fla. 2d DCA 1971); Earls v. King, 785 S.W. 2d 741, 743 (Mo.Ct.App.1990); Parker v. Bowron, 40 Cal.2d 344, 254 P. 2d 6, 9 (1953); 59…
-
Cont'l Cas. Co. v. Ryan Inc. E., 974 So. 2d 368 (Fla. 2008)…. Co., 371 U.S. 132, 137, 83 S.Ct. 232, 9 L.Ed.2d 190 (1962)). When a surety performs or pays on behalf of its principal, it becomes “subrogated to the rights” of both its principal and its obligee. Argonaut Ins. Co. v. Commercial Standard Ins. Co., 380 So. 2d 1066, 1068 (Fla. 2d DCA 1980); accord Auto Owners Ins. Co. v. Travelers Cas. & Sur. Co., 227 F. Supp. 2d 1248, 1259 (M.D.Fla.2002); Transamerica, 540 So. 2d at 115-16; U.S. Fid. & Guar. Co. v. N. Am. Steel Corp., 335 So. 2d 18, 20 (Fla. 2d DCA 1976). Al…
-
Kumar Corp. v. Nopal Lines, Ltd., 462 So. 2d 1178 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985)…troversy.”3 Sierra Club v. Morton, 405 U.S. 727, 731, 92 S.Ct. 1361, 1364, 31 L.Ed.2d 636, 641 (1972). See Gieger v. Sun First National Bank of Orlando, 427 So. 2d 815 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983); Argonaut Insurance Co. v. Commercial Standard Insurance Co., 380 So. 2d 1066 (Fla. 2d [*1183] DCA), rev. denied, 389 So. 2d 1108 (Fla.1980). Under this definition, it can hardly be doubted that Kumar, which under its agreement with Nava was not to be paid until Nava actually sold the merchandise in Venezuela and would thus s…
Previewing 3 of 12 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Carlile v. Game & Fresh Water Fish Comm'n of the State of Fla., 354 So. 2d 362 (Fla. 1977)
- FOY v. State Rd. Dep't of the State of Fla., 166 So. 2d 688 (Fla. 3d DCA 1964)
- Dep't OF Revenue v. Arvida Corp., 315 So. 2d 235 (Fla. 2d DCA 1975)
- Fla. Dep't OF Env't Reg. & Fla. Dep't of Natural Res. v. KEY Haven Associated Enters., Inc., 364 So. 2d 818 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978)