JONNIE JUNIE MCKENZIE, APPELLANT,
v.
ANTHONY JOHN BONNING, APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Doing Business cases and more on FLexlaw
SCHWARTZ, Chief Judge.
The appellant McKenzie is a resident of South Carolina who allegedly contracted to drive a vehicle from that state to Florida. On the way, he was involved in an accident in Georgia. Service of process in the present Florida action for the injuries sustained was, as against him, effected through the Secretary of State under the “doing business” section of the long-arm statute, section 48.193(l)(a), Florida Statutes (1983). He now appeals from, and we reverse, an order denying his motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction. Even assuming, dubitante in extremis, that his entering into a contract to be partially performed in this state constituted “doing business” here, it is obvious that the Georgia accident did not arise out of that activity and that he took no purposeful step to justify subjecting him to the maintenance of such an action in Florida, as are required by the terms of the statute itself and by the demands of due process. E.g., Duke Power Co. v. Hollifield, 471 So. 2d 1365 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985), and cases cited; National Equipment Leasing, Inc. v. Watkins, 471 So. 2d 1369 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985) (Cowart, J., specially concurring).
Reversed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Ranger Nationwide, Inc. v. Cook, 519 So. 2d 1087 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988)…lar application to the present case. See City Contract Bus Serv., Inc. v. Woody, 515 So. 2d 1354 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987) (no Florida jurisdiction over foreign defendants for out of state motor vehicle accident under prior statutes); McKenzie v. Bonning, 474 So. 2d 1241 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985) (same); see also W.C.T.U. Ry., 511 So. 2d at 729. Indeed no other conclusion would be constitutionally permissible. In Helicópteros, the Supreme Court of the United States recently held that an attempt to subject a foreign corpor…
-
The City Contract BUS Serv., Inc. v. H.E. Woody, 515 So. 2d 1354 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987)…6, 1048-9 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985). We find that the connexity requirement of section 48.-181(1) was not sufficiently alleged in the complaints, nor did appellees offer sufficient proof below satisfying the connexity requirement. See McKenzie v. Bonning, 474 So. 2d 1241 (Fla. 3rd DCA 1985). No contract between appellees’ alleged employer, CSX Transportation, Inc., and Georgia Bus was introduced below nor was there any other evidence that such contract, should it exist, contemplates any Florida activity or relations…
Authorities Cited
- Nat'l Equip. Leasing, Inc. v. Watkins, 471 So. 2d 1369 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985)
- Duke Power Co. v. Hollifield, 471 So. 2d 1365 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985)