WILLIAM D. FRANKLIN, INDIVIDUALLY, AND AS TRUSTEE AND ELAINE FRANKLIN, HIS WIFE, APPELLANTS,
v.
SHERWOOD PARK, LTD., INC., AND SHERWOOD FOREST, LTD., INC., OF HOLLYWOOD, APPELLEES
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Motion To Transfer cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
This interlocutory appeal by the defendants is from an order which (1) denied the defendants’ motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction and (2) denied the defendants’ alternative motion to abate for improper venue. The motion to abate for improper venue should have been treated as a motion to transfer. See Ryder Leasing, Inc. v. Jorge, 168 So. 2d 548 (Fla. 3d DCA 1964).
At oral argument, the defendants conceded that the point on personal jurisdiction had become moot because of subsequent personal service upon them.
The plaintiffs’ action sought to enforce a contract to convey title to real property. As such, venue was governed by the “local action” rule. See Sales v. Berzin, 212 So. 2d 23 (Fla. 4th DCA 1968); and Landmark Tower Associates v. First National Bank of Chicago, 439 F.Supp. 195 (S.D.Fla. 1977). We have declined the plaintiffs’ invitation to depart from the established law in this area. The argument that the “local action” rule is without basis in modern law is, in our view, unconvincing when dealing with actions affecting the title to real property.
Affirmed in part; reversed in part; and remanded with directions to transfer the cause to Broward County.
EZELL, BOYCE F., Jr. (Ret.), Associate Judge,
dissenting.
I must respectfully dissent. In my opinion the court below properly denied Appellants’ motion to abate for improper venue. Here, Appellants were non-residents of Florida. The venue privilege afforded a defendant under Section 47.011, Florida Statutes (1977) does not apply if the defendant is a non-resident of Florida. That statutory provision is in conformity with the common law rule that a non-resident may be sued anywhere in Florida so long as the court has jurisdiction of his person. Linger v. Balfour, 102 Fla. 591, 136 So. 433 (Fla.1931).
Thus, suit was properly brought in Dade County, Florida. What is referred to as “the local action rule” does not command a different result. Admittedly, under that rule, a suit seeking the transfer of title to real property is required to be brought in the county wherein the land is situated. Sales v. Berzin, 212 So. 2d 23 (Fla. 4th DCA 1968). At present, Appellee sought specific performance of an option to purchase premises located in Broward County, Florida. Appellants assert that suit should have been brought in the county where the property lies, to-wit: Broward County.
However, a suit to enforce specific performance of an agreement to convey land need not be brought in the county where the land lies. Morgan v. Eaton, 59 Fla. 562, 52 So. 305 (Fla.1910). The cause should thus be affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Royal v. Parado, 462 So. 2d 849 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985)…ny judgment affecting the property in question, based on the local action rule which requires that a suit seeking transfer of title to real property be brought in the county where the real property is situated. Franklin v. Sherwood Park, Ltd., Inc., 380 So. 2d 1323 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980); Hendry Corp. v. State Board of Trustees of Internal Improvement Trust Fund, 313 So. 2d 453 (Fla. 2d DCA 1975). Appellants note that the rule has been phrased in jurisdictional terms, Georgia Casualty Co. v. O’Donnell, 147 So. 267…
-
Harvey v. Loukas Mattes, 484 So. 2d 1382 (Fla. 5th DCA 1986)…n a convenient court. . 77 Am.Jur.2d 833 (1975); Sales v. Berzin, 212 So. 2d 23 (Fla. 4th DCA 1968); Hendry Corp. v. State Bd. of Trustees of Internal Improvement Trust Fund, 313 So. 2d 453 (Fla. 2d DCA 1975); Franklin v. Sherwood Park, Ltd., Inc., 380 So. 2d 1323 (Fla. 3rd DCA 1980). . Miller v. Griffin, 99 Fla. 976, 128 So. 416 (Fla.1930). . See Temple v. Florida Land and Immigration Co., 23 Fla. 406, 2 So. 773 (Fla.1887). . See Hendry Corp. v. State Bd. of Trustees of Internal Improvement Trust Fund, 31…
-
Carter v. Fleming, 567 So. 2d 535 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990)…ndard of review applicable to a determination of venue). The appealed order is reversed and the cause remanded with directions to treat the motion to abate the action for improper venue as a motion to transfer, Franklin v. Sherwood Park, Ltd. Inc., 380 So. 2d 1323 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980); Ryder Leasing, Inc. v. Jorge, 168 So. 2d 548 (Fla. 3d DCA 1964), and transfer the action in accordance with Rule 1.060, Fla.R.Civ.P. (1990), to Duval County. REVERSED AND REMANDED. SHIVERS, C.J., and JOANOS, J., concur. . For…
Previewing 3 of 6 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Morgan v. Eaton, 59 Fla. 562 (Fla. 1910)
- Nancy E. Sales v. Berzin, 212 So. 2d 23 (Fla. 4th DCA 1968)
- Linger v. Balfour, 102 Fla. 591 (Fla. 1931)
- Ryder Leasing, Inc. v. Jorge, 168 So. 2d 548 (Fla. 3d DCA 1964)