FREEDOM SAVINGS & LOAN ASSOCIATION F/K/A COMBANK, A SAVINGS AND LOAN INSTITUTION, AND JEROME FISHKIN, APPELLANTS,
v.
ORMANDY & ASSOCIATES, INC., AND RICHARD D. ORMANDY, APPELLEES
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.
Florida courts lack personal jurisdiction over a Pennsylvania resident for a tort committed in Pennsylvania, even if the effects were felt in Florida.
A Pennsylvania resident guaranteed a loan for a Florida business, then revoked the guarantee from Pennsylvania. The business sued him in Florida for t…
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 Tortious Act Within This State cases and more on FLexlaw
DAUKSCH, Judge.
This is an appeal from a non-final order determining jurisdiction of the person. We have jurisdiction under Rule 9.130(a)(3)(C)(i). The trial court had no jurisdiction over the person of Jerome Fishkin so we reverse the order. Fishkin was a Pennsylvania resident and assisted appellee in obtaining a loan from Freedom Savings & Loan Association, a Florida bank. His assistance amounted to guaranteeing an “irrevocable” letter of credit issued by a Pennsylvania bank to Freedom as collateral for Freedom’s loan to appellee. For some reason Fishkin became disenchanted with the business and told the Pennsylvania bank to withdraw its “irrevocable” letter of credit. It did so and just after that Fishkin called Freedom to ask if the withdrawal, actually a revocation, had been effected. It had. Appellee sued Fishkin alleging that he had tortiously interfered with an advantageous business relationship. Fishkin stated that if he had, he had done it in Pennsylvania, not Florida, and that there was no jurisdiction over him in the Florida court.
The long arm statute, section 48.-193(l)(b), gives jurisdiction to Florida courts over non-citizens or non-residents of this state if the accused “commits a tortious act within this state.” The only act which might be deemed tortious would be causing the actual revocation of the letter of credit. In this regard Fishkin’s acts occurred in Pennsylvania, not Florida. His followup call to determine whether his efforts had succeeded was after the actual commission of the tort, analogous to checking to see if a pulse is detectable on a dead body. Because no part of Fishkin’s alleged tortious conduct occurred in Florida, this court is without jurisdiction. The order is reversed and this cause is remanded to the trial court for a dismissal of the complaint as to Fishkin.
REVERSED AND REMANDED.
ORFINGER and COWART, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Phillips v. Orange Co., Inc., 522 So. 2d 64 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988)…sulting from the appellants’ alleged conduct was suffered by Orange Co. in Florida, the trial court did not have jurisdiction over the appellants pursuant to section 48.193(1)(b). See Freedom Savings & Loan Association v. Ormandy & Associates, Inc., 479 So. 2d 316 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985). We, therefore, reverse the order denying the appellants’ motions to dismiss and remand this cause with instructions to dismiss the complaint as to the appellants. Reversed and remanded. RYDER, A.C.J., and LEHAN, J., concur. .…
-
Jere William Thompson v. Jane DOE (alias), 596 So. 2d 1178 (Fla. 5th DCA 1992)…So. 2d 1373, 1374 (Fla. 5th DCA 1987) (false statements made via telephone from another state to a person in Florida does not constitute the commission of a tortious act in Florida); Freedom Savings & Loan Association v. Ormandy & Associates, Inc., 479 So. 2d 316, 317 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985) (in an action for tortious interference with contract where the only tortious act was the revocation of a letter of credit in Pennsylvania, no part of the tortious act was committed in Florida and Florida court was without j…1 / 2
-
Metnick & Levy, P.A. v. Seuling, 123 So. 3d 639 (Fla. 4th DCA 2013)…. Here, the actions giving rise to the tortious interference claim occurred in New York, where Pirrotti allegedly convinced Seuling to breach her contract. This conclusion finds support in Freedom Savings & Loan Ass’n v. Ormandy & Associates, Inc., 479 So. 2d 316, 317 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985), which held that a defendant’s conduct in Pennsylvania did not confer jurisdiction over the defendant for tortious interference with a Florida business relationship. In Ormandy, the defendant, a Pennsylvania resident, assist…
Previewing 3 of 9 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence