THE HERTZ CORPORATION AND HERTZ INTERNATIONAL, LTD., APPELLANTS,
v.
SYLMA ABADLIA AND HOUCINE ABADLIA, HER HUSBAND, 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.
The Fourth District Court of Appeal reversed a trial court's denial of Hertz's motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction in a products liability case arising from a car rental accident in Tunisia. The court held that the complaint failed to establish the required nexus between the cause of action and Hertz's Florida business activities under the applicable long-arm statute provisions.
The court reversed the denial of the motion to dismiss, holding that the complaint's jurisdictional allegations were insufficient to invoke long-arm jurisdiction under Florida Statutes sections 48.181 and 48.193 because the complaint failed to establish the required nexus between the cause of action and appellants' business activities in Florida.
[1] A Florida court may exercise long-arm jurisdiction over a defendant only if the cause of action arises out of the defendant's activities within Florida.
[2] The "connexity" requirement, which mandates a connection between the cause of action and the defendant's Florida activities, applies to causes of action that arose before…
Previewing 2 of 4 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“Both sections 48.181 and 48.193, Florida Statutes (1984), require that there be a "connexity" between the cause of action and the defendant corporation's activities in Florida.”
Establishes the legal standard for personal jurisdiction under Florida's long-arm statute requiring nexus between cause of action and defendant's in-state activities.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceSylma and Houcine Abadlia arranged to rent a Hertz automobile for their vacation in Tunisia. The rental car was allegedly defective and caused an acci…
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 Connexity Requirement cases and more on FLexlaw
DOWNEY, Judge.
Appellants, The Hertz Corporation and Hertz International, LTD., appeal from a non-final order denying their motion to dismiss the complaint against them for lack of personal jurisdiction.
Appellees, Sylma Abadlia and Houcine Abadlia, arranged to rent a Hertz car for their vacation in Tunisia. The rental car was allegedly defective, causing an accident resulting in injury to Mrs. Abadlia. The Abadlias filed a complaint in the circuit court of Broward County against Hertz Corporation and Hertz International, LTD., for breach of implied warranties, strict liability, negligence, and breach of contract. The Hertz Corporation and Hertz International, LTD., moved to dismiss the complaint on the grounds of lack of in person-am jurisdiction and specifically stated:
It affirmatively appears from the Complaint that the incident giving rise to the subject claim did not occur within the State of Florida and did not arise out of the business of either the HERTZ CORPORATION or HERTZ INTERNATIONAL, LTD. being conducted within this state and accordingly, the Florida long-arm statute does not provide jurisdiction herein over these Defendants.
We find that the trial court erred in denying the motion to dismiss for the following reasons.
Paragraphs 6, 7, and 8 of the complaint, which set forth the basis for in personam jurisdiction over the appellants, read as follows:
6. At all times material to this action, Defendants, HERTZ INTERNATIONAL, LTD. and TUNISIE AUTO TOURISME, S.A., sold, consigned or leased tangible personal property in this state, including automobiles, through THE HERTZ CORPORATION which was acting as their broker, distributor, or agent. 7. At all times material to this action, Defendants, HERTZ INTERNATIONAL, LTD. and TUNISIE AUTO TOURISME, S.A., operated, conducted, engaged in or carried on a business or business venture in this state through their agent or parent, THE HERTZ CORPORATION.
8. Prior to August 22,1983, Plaintiffs contacted HERTZ to reserve a car for use on their vacation in Tunisia and HERTZ agreed to rent a suitable vehicle to Plaintiffs.
Significantly, appellees fail to allege where the lease agreement was entered into and further do not state that this cause of action arose out of appellants’ activities in Florida.
Both sections 48.181 and 48.193, Florida Statutes (1984), require that there be a “connexity” between the cause of action and the defendant corporation’s activities in Florida. See Moo Young v. Air Canada, 445 So. 2d 1102 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984); American Motors Corporation v. Abrahantes, 474 So. 2d 271 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985); Setko Fasteners, Inc. v. Kuester, 470 So. 2d 838 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985). The complaint does not demonstrate any connection between the cause of action and appellants’ business activities in Florida, and therefore the jurisdictional allegations of the complaint are not sufficient to invoke long-arm jurisdiction under sections 48.181 and 48.-193.
In addition, we note that the amendment to section 48.193, Florida Statutes, which became effective on April 25, 1984, abolishing the connexity requirement should not be retroactively applied to this case. See AB CTC v. Morejon, 324 So. 2d 625 (Fla.1975); Gordon v. John Deere Co., 264 So. 2d 419 (Fla.1972); Astra v. Colt Industries Operating Corp., 452 So. 2d 1031 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984); American Motors Corp. v. Abrahantes, supra; A.J. Sackett & Sons Co. v. Frey, 462 So. 2d 98 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985).
Accordingly, the order appealed from is reversed.
HERSEY, C.J., and HURLEY, J., concur.
DOWNEY, Judge.
By petition for rehearing appellees point out that The Hertz Corporation conceded in appellant’s brief that it is subject to the jurisdiction of the trial court, although The Hertz Corporation went to great pains to convince us that it should not even be sued in this case. Be that as it may, our opinion of December 31, 1985, reversing the non-final order as to The Hertz Corporation was in error. Appellees further contend that, at the least, we should, on remand, direct the trial court to allow appellees to file an amended complaint to allege facts that would show jurisdiction.
Accordingly, we amend our opinion of December 31, 1985, to provide:
1. That the order of the trial court as to The Hertz Corporation is affirmed.
2. That the order as to Hertz International, Ltd., is reversed and the cause is remanded for further proceedings including allowing appellees to file an amended complaint if they be so advised.
HERSEY, C.J., and HURLEY, DANIEL T.K., Associate Judge, concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Windels v. Solitron Devices, Inc., 510 So. 2d 1177 (Fla. 4th DCA 1987)…portion of the representation being conducted elsewhere. We are not unmindful of the requirement that the plaintiff establish a “connexity” between the forum state activities and the subject matter of the cause of action. See Hertz Corp. v. Abadlia, 489 So. 2d 753 (Fla. 4th DCA 1985); Kravitz v. Gebrueder Pletscher Druck-Gusswaremfabrik, 442 So. 2d 985 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983). Section 48.193 was amended in 1984 to expand jurisdiction to cover a defendant engaged in substantial activities within Florida regardless…
-
Util. Trailer Mfg. v. Green Cornett and Betty Cornett, 526 So. 2d 1064 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988)…the amendment does not apply to suits filed after its effective date if the cause of action accrued before the effective date, reasoning that the legislature had not clearly and unmistakably evinced such an intent. See also, Hertz Corp. v. Abadlia, 489 So. 2d 753 (Fla. 4th DCA 1986); Polskie, supra. The Abrahantes court noted that such a construction as to the applicability of the statute avoids “grave doubts” regarding the constitutionality of retroactive application. The legislature has not revisited the a…
-
HERTZ Int'l, Ltd. v. Sylma Abadlia and Houcine Abadlia, 540 So. 2d 170 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989)…PER CURIAM. Hertz International, Ltd., a foreign corporation, appeals from an order of the Bro-ward County Circuit Court denying its motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction. We reverse. In Hertz Corporation v. Abadlia, 489 So. 2d 753 (Fla. 4th DCA 1985), present appellant was one of two appellants from an earlier order denying a similar motion. This court found that the complaint as then written failed to demonstrate any connection between the cause of action and appellant’s bus…
Previewing 3 of 5 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- AB CTC v. Morejon, 324 So. 2d 625 (Fla. 1975)
- Abner Wynn Gordon v. The John Deere Co., 264 So. 2d 419 (Fla. 1972)
- Am. Motors Corp. & Jeep Corp. v. Abrahantes, 474 So. 2d 271 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985)
- Young v. AIR Canada, 445 So. 2d 1102 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984)
- Astra v. Colt Indus. Operating Corp., 452 So. 2d 1031 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984)
- A.J. Sackett & Sons Co. v. Frey, 462 So. 2d 98 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985)
- Wheelock J. Mims v. State, 470 So. 2d 838 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985)
- Setko Fasteners, Inc. v. Kuester, 470 So. 2d 838 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985)