ITEL-PAS, INC., A FOREIGN CORPORATION, APPELLANT,
v.
HARRY F. JONES, M. D., 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.
ITEL-Pas, a foreign corporation, sued Dr. Harry Jones for breach of a written agreement and non-payment of money. The trial court transferred venue from Dade County to Broward County, but the appellate court reversed, holding that venue was proper in Dade County where the cause of action occurred and where the payee's place of business is located.
Venue was proper in Dade County under Section 47.011, Florida Statutes, because the cause of action occurred there. When the written agreement is silent as to the place of payment, the law implies that payment is to be made where the payee resides or has an established place of business, making Dade County the location where the cause of action accrued. The trial court abused its discretion in transferring the cause because the defendant failed to carry the burden of proving sufficient reason to transfer under Section 47.122.
[1] Venue for an action may be brought in the county where the defendant resides, where the cause of action occurred, or where the property in litigation is located.
[2] When a written agreement is silent as to the place of payment, the law implies that payment is to be made where the payee resides or has an established place of business.
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“Where actions may be brought.-Actions shall be brought only in the county where the defendant resides, where the cause of action occurred, or where the property in litigation is located.”
Establishes the statutory framework for venue under Section 47.011, Florida Statutes
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceITEL-Pas, Inc. has its principal place of business in Dade County. Defendant Dr. Harry F. Jones resides in Broward County. The parties had a written a…
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 Implied Place Of Payment cases and more on FLexlaw
BASKIN, Judge.
In this action for damages for breach of a written agreement and non-payment of money, venue lies in Dade County. We therefore reverse the order in which the trial court transferred the cause to Broward County.
Section 47.011, Florida Statutes (1979) states:
Where actions may be begun.-Aetions shall be brought only in the county where the defendant resides, where the cause of action occurred, or where the property in litigation is located.
Plaintiff-appellant Itel-Pas, Inc. has its principal place of business in Dade County. Defendant-appellee Harry F. Jones, M. D. resides in Broward County. The written agreement is silent as to the place of payment. The law then implies that payment is to be made where the payee resides or has an established place of business and where payment under the contract may be made. Williams v. Aeroland Oil Co., 20 So. 2d 346 (Fla.1944); Croker v. Powell, 115 Fla. 733, 156 So. 146 (Fla.1934); State of Florida, Department of Transportation v. San Marco Contracting Co., 355 So. 2d 133 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978); Davis v. Dempsey, 343 So. 2d 950 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977). In this case, the place of payment was not contained in the written agreement; the cause of action therefore accrued in Dade County, the site of the payee’s residence and place of business.
Applying section 47.011, we find that defendant resides in Broward County but the cause of action occurred in Dade County. To determine whether the trial court abused its discretion in transferring the cause, we review cases concerning choice of venue.
Election of venue is the prerogative of the plaintiff. Perry Building Systems, Inc. v. Hayes & Bates, Inc., 361 So. 2d 443 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978); Florida Forms, Inc. v. Barkett Computer Services, Inc., 311 So. 2d 730 (Fla. 4th DCA 1975); O’Brien v. Mitchell, 190 So. 2d 189 (Fla. 1st DCA 1966).
When venue is proper in more than one county, plaintiff may choose the county in which to file. Houchins v. Florida East Coast Railway Co., 388 So. 2d 1287 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980). In order to prevail on a motion to transfer for improper venue, defendant must show that venue will not lie or that good reason to transfer exists under Section 47.122, Florida Statutes (1979). Perry Building Systems, Inc. v. Hayes & Bates, Inc., supra; Florida Forms, Inc. v. Barkett Computer Services, Inc., supra. We hold that the action was properly filed in Dade County, the site of the cause of action, and that defendant failed to carry the burden of proving a sufficient reason to transfer the cause to Broward County. Sheffield Steel Products, Inc. v. Powell Brothers, Inc., 385 So. 2d 161 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980).
Reversed and remanded.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (11 total)
-
Pellerito Foods, Inc. v. Am. Conveyors Corp., 542 So. 2d 426 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989)…ace of business, and where payment under the contract may be made.” Katz v. Richard Plumer Co., 479 So. 2d 874 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985) (quoting M.A. Kite Co. v. A.C. Samford, Inc., 130 So. 2d 99, 101 (Fla. 1st DCA 1961)). Accord, Itel-Pas, Inc. v. Jones, 389 So. 2d 1085 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980). American alleged that payment was due in Dade County, Florida, and that Pellerito had breached the contract by failing to pay. Its complaint therefore met the pleading requirements of section 48.193. See Wynn v. Aetna Life Ins.…
-
Carlson-Southeast Corp. & Seaboard Sur. Co. v. Geolithic, Inc., 530 So. 2d 1069 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988)…ard County until approximately a week before the hearing on the motion to transfer venue. It is well settled that venue is the plaintiff’s prerogative. Perry Building Systems, Inc. v. Hayes & Bates, Inc., 361 So. 2d at 444; Itel-Pas, Inc. v. Jones, 389 So. 2d 1085, 1086 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980); Florida Forms, Inc. v. Barkett Computer Services, Inc., 311 So. 2d 730, 731 (Fla. 4th DCA 1975). When venue is proper in more than one county, the plaintiff may choose the county in which to file the action. Itel-Pas, Inc.,…
-
Washington v. Washington, 613 So. 2d 594 (Fla. 5th DCA 1993)…the child, decreasing, increasing, or confirming the amount of separate support, maintenance, or alimony provided for in the agreement or order. . See Inverness Coca-Cola Bottling Co. v. McDaniel, 78 So. 2d 100 (Fla.1955); Itel-Pas, Inc. v. Jones, 389 So. 2d 1085 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980); Peavy v. Parrish, 385 So. 2d 1034 (Fla. 4th DCA 1980); Perry Building Systems, Inc. v. Hayes & Bates, Inc., 361 So. 2d 443 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978); Florida Forms, Inc. v. Barkett Computer Services, Inc., 311 So. 2d 730 (Fla. 4th DCA…
Previewing 3 of 11 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited (11 total)
- Williams v. Aeroland OIL Co., 155 Fla. 114 (Fla. 1944)
- Simmons v. State, 115 Fla. 733 (Fla. 1934)
- Jung H. Moon v. Ima-Park Place, LLC (Fla. 3d DCA 2021)
- W. D. Little, Jr., M.D. v. Smeltzer, 361 So. 2d 443 (Fla. 2d DCA 1978)
- Coleman P. Houchins, Jr. v. Fla. E. Coast Ry. Co., 388 So. 2d 1287 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980)
- Davis v. Dempsey, 343 So. 2d 950 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977)
- Fla. Forms, Inc. v. Barkett Computer Servs., Inc., 311 So. 2d 730 (Fla. 4th DCA 1975)
- Blanco v. Dep't OF Revenue, 385 So. 2d 161 (Fla. 2d DCA 1980)
- Sheffield Steel Prods., Inc. v. Powell Bros., Inc., 385 So. 2d 161 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980)
- O'Brien v. Mitchell, 190 So. 2d 189 (Fla. 1st DCA 1966)