RONALD L. HAUCK AND INTERNATIONAL AIRCRAFT CORPORATION, APPELLANTS,
v.
TRIANA CUSTOM HOMES, 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.
This case involves an appeal from a trial court's denial of a motion to dismiss for improper venue. The appellate court reversed the trial court's decision, finding that venue was proper in Dade County based on the parties' agreement and other factors.
No, the trial court erred in denying the motion to dismiss for improper venue. Venue was proper in Dade County due to the parties' agreement, the appellants' residence there, and the location of the disputed property.
[1] A contractual agreement specifying venue for lawsuits is enforceable.
[2] Venue is proper in a county where the defendant resides.
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“The parties entered into an airplane swapping contract and included in its provisions an agreement that venue for any lawsuits brought to enforce the agreement would be in Dade County.”
Establishes the contractual agreement regarding venue.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe parties entered into an airplane swapping contract that stipulated venue for any lawsuits would be in Dade County. Despite this agreement, the tri…
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 Improper Venue cases and more on FLexlaw
DAUKSCH, Judge.
This is an appeal from a non-final order denying a motion to dismiss for improper venue.
The parties entered into an airplane swapping contract and included in its provisions an agreement that venue for any lawsuits brought to enforce the agreement would be in Dade County. Despite this agreement, and for no stated reason, the trial judge denied the motion to dismiss for improper venue. Various venues are involved in the sequence of events leading up to the lawsuit. Hernando County, where the appellant’s airplane was first demonstrated, the contract was partially negotiated and where the trade-in aircraft sits. Dade County, where the contract was finally negotiated and executed, where appellants reside and operate, where an amended contract was entered into and where the cash deposit and logbooks for the trade-in aircraft are situate.
The venue is proper in Dade County because the defendants (appellants) reside there, because the property in dispute is there and because the parties so agreed. All of this is supported by affidavits of appellant. Appellee filed none, no sworn evidence supports its venue claim, which ipso facto is frivolous. §§ 47.011, 47.021, 47.041, 47.051, 47.091, 47.122, Fla.Stats. (1984); Business Aide Computers, Inc. v. Central Florida Mack Trucks, Inc., 432 So. 2d 681 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983); Shay v. First Federal of Miami, Inc., 429 So. 2d 64 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983); Southeastern Office Supply and Furniture Company v. Barley, 427 So. 2d 1139 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983); Honea v. Walker Chemical and Exterminating Co., Inc., 393 So. 2d 1210 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981); McTeague v. Treibits, 388 So. 2d 309 (Fla. 4th DCA 1980); Blackhawk Heating & Plumbing Co., Inc. v. Database Financial Corporation, 302 So. 2d 404 (Fla.1974); Deeb, Inc. v. Board of Public Instruction of Columbia County, 196 So. 2d 22 (Fla. 2d DCA 1967).
The order appealed is reversed and this cause remanded for entry of an order transferring venue at appellee’s sole expense.
REVERSED and REMANDED.
FRANK D. UPCHURCH, Jr., and CO-WART, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
B.R.W. Ins., Inc. v. Mannino, 654 So. 2d 1304 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995)…the alternative, to transfer the case from Marion County to Broward County. We reverse with instructions to grant the motion to transfer. See Tropicana Prods., Inc. v. Shirley, 501 So. 2d 1373 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987); Hauck v. Triana Custom Homes, Inc., 467 So. 2d 707 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985). REVERSED and REMANDED. HARRIS, C.J, and GOSHORN and PETERSON, JJ, concur.…
-
Minto Builders (Florida), Inc. v. Suncrete Corp., 659 So. 2d 1356 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995)…Minto Builders, Inc. appeals from the order denying its motion to transfer the cause from Seminole County to Broward County. We reverse. See Tropicana Prods., Inc., v. Shirley, 501 So. 2d 1373 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987); Hauck v. Triana Custom Homes, Inc., 467 So. 2d 707 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985). REVERSED and REMANDED. [*1357] PETERSON, C.J., and GOSHORN, J., concur. COBB, J., dissents, with opinion.…
Authorities Cited
- Blackhawk Heating & Plumbing Co., Inc. v. Data Lease Fin. Corp., 302 So. 2d 404 (Fla. 1974)
- Ira Shay & Shalev Corp. v. First Fed. OF Miami, Inc., 429 So. 2d 64 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983)
- Bus. Aide Computers, Inc. v. Cent. Fla. Mack Trucks, Inc., 432 So. 2d 681 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983)
- Se. Off. Supply & Furniture Co., Inc. v. Barley, 427 So. 2d 1139 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983)
- Deeb v. The Bd. OF Pub. Instruction OF Columbia Cnty., 196 So. 2d 22 (Fla. 2d DCA 1967)
- Honea v. Walker Chem. & Exterminating Co., Inc., 393 So. 2d 1210 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981)
- Scaglione v. Best, 196 So. 2d 22 (Fla. 2d DCA 1967)
- McTEAGUE v. Treibits, 388 So. 2d 309 (Fla. 4th DCA 1980)