KATHLEEN R. GIOIA, MICKEY GIOIA, KATHY GIOIA AND PAT GIOIA, APPELLANTS,
v.
ANTHONY A. GIOIA, 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 appellate court affirmed the trial court's dismissal of a case for lack of jurisdiction. The court held that a non-resident father's obligation for past-due child support to adult children residing in Florida did not establish sufficient contact with Florida to justify personal jurisdiction over him.
No, the court held that these contacts were insufficient to justify the exercise of personal jurisdiction over the father in Florida. The court found the father's prior custody suit did not create sufficient additional contact to satisfy due process requirements.
“Under Kulko we do not believe a non-resident father’s liability for past due child support under a foreign decree of divorce to adult children who now reside in Florida constitutes sufficient contact with the state to justify the exercise of personal jurisdiction over the father.”
This quote establishes the court's primary reasoning for affirming the dismissal based on lack of personal jurisdiction.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAppellants sought to enforce a foreign divorce decree for past-due child support against the appellee, a non-resident father. The adult children for w…
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 Motion To Dismiss For Lack Of Jurisdiction cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
We affirm the order of the trial court granting the appellee’s motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction. See Kulko v. Superior Court, 436 U.S. 84, 98 S.Ct. 1690, 56 L.Ed.2d 132 (1978). Under Kulko we do not believe a non-resident father’s liability for past due child support under a foreign decree of divorce to adult children who now reside in Florida constitutes sufficient contact with the state to justify the exercise of personal jurisdiction over the father. The father’s unsuccessful prosecution of a child custody suit in Florida in 1967 does not constitute sufficient additional contact to satisfy Kulko’s due process requirements. But see Bell v. Tuffnell, 418 So. 2d 422 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982), which holds that the failure of an unwed father of a child residing in Florida to pay support constitutes a tortious act for purposes of invoking jurisdiction over the father. In Bell it was alleged that the child was conceived in Florida and that the mother and child resided here. We think those facts, while apparently not critical to the First District’s decision, distinguish that case from this one. We do not believe the Bell holding can be extended to cover the situation involved herein.1 We are bound by the decisions of the United States Supreme Court when those decisions invoke a provision of the United States Constitution. Such is the case here where the due process provisions of the Constitution form the basis of the Kulko decision.
ANSTEAD, C.J., and GLICKSTEIN and HURLEY, JJ., concur. . We note that appellants are not without a viable remedy. The Uniform Reciprocal Enforcement of Support Act (URESA) provides for payment of arrearages of support past due and unpaid. § 88.031(3) and § 88.111, Fla. Stat. (1981). The wife proceeded under URE-SA in 1974 to enforce the child support provisions of the couple’s Texas divorce decree. She may now pursue an action under URESA to enforce the payment of arrearages that have accrued as a result of that order.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Adolfo Girau v. Girau, 544 So. 2d 1117 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989)…n existed' between the husband and Florida to make it fair to require the husband’s defense of this action in Florida. See Laney v. Laney, 487 So. 2d 1109 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986); Overcash v. Overcash, 466 So. 2d 1261 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985); Gioia v. Gioia, 435 So. 2d 367 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983). For the foregoing reasons, the final judgment appealed is reversed with directions to grant the husband’s motion to dismiss for want of in personam jurisdiction.…
-
Segal v. Madelyn Russell, 553 So. 2d 346 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989)…ida while the mother resided here, and that the father communicated with the children here, does not create such contacts with Florida as to make appellant amenable to jurisdiction. Girau v. Girau, 544 So. 2d 1117 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989); Gioia v. Gioia, 435 So. 2d 367 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983). Accordingly, we hold that appellee failed to show sufficient minimum contacts with Florida to enable the courts of Florida to obtain jurisdiction over appellant under section 48.193(l)(g), Florida Statutes (1987). LETTS and DE…
Authorities Cited
- Kulko v. Superior Court of Cal. in & for the City & Cnty. of San Francisco (horn, 436 U.S. 84 (U.S. 1978)
- Bell v. Vivien Joy Tuffnell, 418 So. 2d 422 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982)