ABNER WYNN GORDON, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT,
v.
THE JOHN DEERE COMPANY ET AL., DEFENDANTS-APPELLEES

5th Cir. | 1972-09-18
No. 71-1824
466 F.2d 1200 Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit (1972) Positive Treatment
Cited by 24 cases

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.


Holding

The court held that service of process in federal diversity actions is governed by state law, not a uniform federal standard, and that Fla.Stat. § 48.182 does not apply retroactively.


Facts & Procedural History

The case's disposition hinged on a certified question to the Florida Supreme Court regarding the retroactive application of Fla.Stat. § 48.182. The Fl…

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.


Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM:

PER CURIAM:

The disposition of this case rests on the answer to a question that we certified to the Supreme Court of Florida.1 Fla.Stat. § 25.031, F.S.A., Fla.App. Rules 4.61, 32 F.S.A. The question certified was whether or not Florida Statutes, Section 48.182 (1970), F.S.A., applies retroactively to allow service under its provisions as to an alleged wrongful act committed prior to the enactment of the statute. The Supreme Court of Florida has ruled that § 48.182 is not to be retroactively applied.2 This ruling is consistent with the position taken by the district court, 320 F.Supp. 293, in dismissing the action against Deere & Company and John Deere of Baltimore.

Appellant contends that service of process on foreign corporations in federal diversity actions should be governed by a uniform federal standard, rather than by the state law standard of the state in which the federal court sits. We have previously held otherwise. Stanga v. McCormick Shipping Corp., 268 F. 2d 544 (5th Cir. 1959); Time, Inc. v. Manning, 366 F. 2d 690 (5th Cir. 1966); Woodham v. Northwestern Steel & Wire Co., 390 F. 2d 27 (5th Cir. 1968).3

The district court’s order, therefore, must be affirmed.

Affirmed.

. The facts of the case and the certified question are reported at 451 F. 2d 234 (5th Cir. 1971).

. Gordon v. John Deere Co., 264 So. 2d 419 (Fla.1972).

. For a thorough discussion of the issue and a collection of cases from other Circuits see Arrowsmith v. United Press International, 320 F. 2d 219 (2nd Cir. 1963) (En Banc).


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By (15 total)

  • Bloom v. AH Pond Co., Inc., 519 F. Supp. 1162 (S.D. Fla. 1981)
    …eguards to protect the nonresident under these circumstances. B Personal jurisdiction in a federal diversity action is governed by the state law standard of the state in which the federal court sits. 2 Gordon v. John Deere Company, 466 F.2d 1200 (5th Cir. 1972); Woodham v. Northwestern Steel and Wire Company, 390 F.2d 27 (5th Cir. 1968); Time, Inc. v. Manning, 366 F.2d 690 (5th Cir. 1966); Stanga v. McCormack Shipping Corporation, 268 F.2d 544 (5th Cir. 1959). While consti…
  • Barnes v. Atl. & Pac. Life Ins. Co. OF Am., 514 F.2d 704 (5th Cir. 1975)

Previewing 3 of 15 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw