JOEL JAFFER, APPELLANT,

v.

MIAMI BEACH REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY, APPELLEE

Citator

Cited By (36 total)

• Harlan C. "Bud" Lacy v. Force V Corp., 403 So. 2d 1050 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981)
  …insured was a resident of that state when he died; therefore it would not be unfair or unreasonable to require the nonresident to defend the suit in California.4 Recently the Florida Supreme Court in Ford Motor Co. v. Atwood Vacuum Machine Company, 392 So. 2d 1305 (Fla.1981), required an out-of-state component parts manufacturer to submit itself to the jurisdiction of the Florida courts. Although the Atwood decision was not concerned with a situation showing that the nonresident had established a single conta…
• Engineered Storage Sys., Inc. v. Nat'l Partitions & Interiors, Inc., 415 So. 2d 114 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982)
  …econd District’s holding in Lakewood Pipe, supra and Osborn v. University Society, Inc. supra, that constitutional requirements are not met by relying solely on Section 48.193(l)(g), Florida Statutes. In Ford Motor Co. v. Atwood Vacuum Machine Co., 392 So. 2d 1305 (Fla.1981), the Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of subsection 48.193(l)(f) (doing of an act or an omission outside the state by a nonresident defendant which causes injury to a person within the state), with a specific holding that the In…
• Robert v. Carida, 424 So. 2d 849 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982)
  …he State. More recently, the Supreme Court has looked at minimum contacts under Section 48.193(1)(f)(2) dealing with products manufactured elsewhere but consumed within this State. In the case of Ford Motor Company v. Atwood Vacuum Machine Company, 392 So. 2d 1305 (Fla.1981), plaintiffs brought a suit for damages against Ford Motor Company and a Florida Ford dealer for injuries allegedly caused by the faulty operation of a rear door hinge on a Ford station wagon. Ford filed a third party complaint against Atw…