JUAN CAMERON, APPELLANT,
v.
ODISSEA SHIPPING CO., DIDO SHIPPING CO., S.A., AND SVERIGES ANGFARTYGS ASSURANS FORENING (THE SWEDISH CLUB), 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 appellate court affirmed the trial court's finding of defective service of process but reversed the dismissal of the complaint, holding that dismissal was premature where service was merely defective rather than establishing lack of jurisdiction.
Dismissal of a complaint is premature when the court finds service of process defective but has not determined whether the defendant is subject to jurisdiction; the proper remedy is to quash service and allow re-service rather than dismiss.
[1] When service of process is found defective, dismissal of the complaint is premature if jurisdictional issues remain contested; the proper remedy is to quash service and p…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligencePlaintiff Cameron attempted to serve process on Odissea Shipping Co. through a Greek attorney and on both Odissea and Dido Shipping Co. through a Miam…
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 Jurisdictional Question cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
We affirm the lower court’s finding that there were insufficiencies in the service of process without reaching the merits of the other issues raised by appellant. The attempted service of process on the defendant, Odissea Shipping Co., was by a Greek attorney who delivered a summons and complaint on a purported agent of the nonresident corporate defendant. Plaintiff Cameron also attempted service of process on defendants, Odissea Shipping Co. and Dido Shipping Co., by delivering a summons and complaint on the manager of another purported agent in Miami who filed an uncontroverted affidavit stating that he had no authority to receive service of process on behalf of defendants. The two forms of attempted service did not satisfy statutory requirements. See Biscayne Athletic Club, Inc. v. Iacono, 367 So. 2d 275 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979); §§ 48.081, 48.161, 48.194, Fla.Stat. (1985).
Further, there was no showing that plaintiff complied with the requirements of section 626.906, Florida Statutes (1985) in serving defendant, The Swedish Club, through service on the insurance commissioner. On the record before us, dismissal of the complaint on the basis of the contested jurisdictional issues was premature after the court had determined, correctly, that service was defective.
The order on review, to the extent it quashes service of process, is AFFIBMED; the dismissal of the complaint is REVERSED.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Avila v. Pacindat Mut. Prot. & Indem. Ass'n, Ltd., 528 So. 2d 510 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988)…28, 130 (Fla. 3d DCA) (plaintiff entitled to discovery from defendant in attempt to establish jurisdiction), rev. denied, 496 So. 2d 143 (Fla.1986), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 1090, 107 S.Ct. 1299, 94 L.Ed.2d 155 (1987); Cameron v. Odissea Shipping Co., 486 So. 2d 30, 31 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986) (premature dismissal on jurisdictional issues); Reddish v. Fortines, 207 So. 2d 703, 707-08 (Fla. 1st DCA 1968) (premature dismissal for failure to prosecute where discovery outstanding). Upon remand, the trial court shall p…
-
Naviera Blancamar, S.A. v. Boucher, 547 So. 2d 1034 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989)…, and none of which appears dispositive of the issue. In order to defeat the motion to quash service it was necessary for plaintiffs to submit affidavits or other competent proof rebutting defendant’s assertions. See Cameron v. Odissea Shipping Co., 486 So. 2d 30 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986); Biscayne Athletic Club, Inc. v. Iacono, 367 So. 2d 275 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979). Plaintiffs also contend that they were unable to contravene defendant’s affidavit because of discovery objections by defendant. That issue is not before…
Authorities Cited
- Biscayne Athletic Club, Inc. v. Iacono, 367 So. 2d 275 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979)