JACOBSON MANUFACTURING COMPANY, APPELLANT,
v.
CROSS MANUFACTURING COMPANY, APPELLEE. JACOBSON MANUFACTURING COMPANY, APPELLANT, V. HYDRO HOSE, 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.
Jacobson Manufacturing appealed the dismissal of its third-party complaint against component suppliers Cross Manufacturing and Hydra Hose, asserting Florida long-arm jurisdiction. The court reversed, holding that the defendants' manufacture and distribution of component parts incorporated into a product used in Florida invoked jurisdiction under Florida's long-arm statute.
Florida courts have jurisdiction over the non-resident defendants under the long-arm statute. The undisputed factual allegations that the defendants manufactured and distributed component parts that were used in Florida in the ordinary course of commerce, and that use resulted in injury, are sufficient to invoke jurisdiction.
[1] Florida's long-arm statute confers jurisdiction over a non-resident whose products, manufactured anywhere, were used or consumed within Florida in the ordinary course of…
[2] Undisputed factual allegations are sufficient to invoke jurisdiction under Florida's long-arm statute when they establish the elements required by the statute.
Previewing 2 of 3 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“Products, materials, or things processed, serviced, or manufactured by the defendant anywhere were used or consumed within this state in the ordinary course of commerce, trade, or use, and the use or consumption resulted in the injury.”
The statutory basis for long-arm jurisdiction over non-residents whose products cause injury in Florida
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceCross Manufacturing manufactured T-swivels in Kansas and sold them F.O.B. to Hydra Hose, also in Kansas. Hydra Hose then sold the swivels to Jacobson …
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 Florida Long Arm Statute cases and more on FLexlaw
HERSEY, Judge.
Cross Manufacturing Company is a manufacturer of hydraulic component parts which are sold to equipment manufacturers and distributors. Its products are sold F.O.B. the factory in Kansas. It manufactured the T-swivels involved here at a factory in Kansas. Those T-swivels were then sold to Hydra Hose, Inc., a distributor, also in Kansas.
The T-swivels were sold by Hydra Hose to appellant, Jacobson Manufacturing Company. The sale took place in Kansas. Jacobson then incorporated the T-swivels into lawn sweepers which it manufactured in Kansas.
One of these lawn sweepers found its way to Florida, allegedly malfunctioned, and injured an employee of its purchaser who then filed suit against the manufacturer, appellant Jacobson.
On theories of indemnity and contribution, appellant filed a third party complaint against Cross and Hydra Hose and effected service of process under Section 48.-193(l)(f)(2), Florida Statutes (1979), Florida’s “long-arm” statute.
Cross and Hydra Hose moved to dismiss the complaint and quash service of process on the grounds that the third party complaint failed to allege any facts which would subject them to jurisdiction pursuant to Section 48.193. The factual allegations of the complaint were not disputed. The trial court entered an order on these motions, dismissing the third party complaint and quashing service of process for lack of jurisdiction over appellee corporations. That order is the subject of this appeal.
Under Section 48.193(l)(f)(2), Florida Statutes (1979), Florida courts have jurisdiction over a non-resident who
(f) Causes injury to persons or property within this state arising out of an act or omission outside of this state by the defendant, provided that at the time of the injury either: 2. Products, materials, or things processed, serviced, or manufactured by the defendant anywhere were used or consumed within this state in the ordinary course of commerce, trade, or use, and the use or consumption resulted in the injury.
In support of its assertion of long-arm jurisdiction, appellant alleged the manufacture and distribution of the component part (the swivel). Appellant further alleged that this part was used in the state of Florida “in the ordinary course of commerce.”
Recently, in Ford Motor Co. v. Atwood Vacuum Machine Co., 392 So. 2d 1305 (Fla. 1981), the supreme court held that undisputed factual allegations such as those involved here are sufficient to invoke jurisdiction under the long-arm statute and that the statute was intended to apply in such situations.
Accordingly, we reverse the trial court’s order and remand with directions that the third party complaint be reinstated.
REVERSED AND REMANDED.
LETTS, C. J., and HURLEY, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Robert v. Carida, 424 So. 2d 849 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982)…istribution, or marketing of the finished product in the State is no basis for a limitation of jurisdiction.” Shortly after the Ford decision, this Court issued an opinion in the case of Jacobson Manufacturing Company v. Cross Manufacturing Company, 396 So. 2d 825 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981). In that case, Cross Manufacturing, a Kansas manufacturer of hydraulic component parts, sold T-swivels to Hydra Hose, Inc., a Kansas distributor. The T-swivels were sold in Kansas by Hydra Hose to Jacobson Manufacturing, who inco…
-
Louis Winer Co., Inc. v. SAN Francisco Mercantile Co., Inc., 501 So. 2d 171 (Fla. 4th DCA 1987)…so based upon the systematic and continuous shipment of the defendant’s glass into Florida as supporting knowledge by the defendant that its products would be used in Florida. In a second case, Jacobson Manufacturing Co. v. Cross Manufacturing Co., 396 So. 2d 825 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981), the defendant, a Kansas corporation, sold component parts for lawn sweepers to another Kansas corporation. One of the sweepers was shipped to Florida in the ordinary course of commerce and caused injury to the plaintiff. Based u…
-
Brown v. Jacobson Mfg. Co., 396 So. 2d 827 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981)…PER CURIAM. Reversed upon authority of Ford Motor Co. v. Atwood Vacuum Machine Co., 392 So. 2d 1305 (Fla.1981); and Jacobson Manufacturing Co. v. Cross Manufacturing Co., 396 So. 2d 825, Fla. 4th DCA Case No. 79-2417, Opinion filed April 8, 1981. REVERSED. DOWNEY, BERANEK and HERSEY, JJ., concur.…
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
- Jaffer v. Miami Beach Redev. Agency, 392 So. 2d 1305 (Fla. 1980)