FIRST OF GEORGIA INSURANCE COMPANY, A FOREIGN CORPORATION, APPELLANT,
v.
DONNA LLOYD, INDIVIDUALLY, AND AS GUARDIAN OF SCOTT P. ELLINGTON, A MINOR, APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Personal Jurisdiction cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
First of Georgia Insurance Company appeals a non-final order denying its motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction. We affirm.
The appellant insurance company wrote an automobile insurance policy for the appellee insured while she resided in Georgia. The insured moved to Florida, where the insurer did not do business and was not authorized to do business. With knowledge that the insured had become a Florida resident, the insurer increased its coverage on the insured automobile, and collected a premium for the additional coverage. That was sufficient to establish jurisdiction, and authorize service, under Florida’s Unauthorized Insurers Process Law, §§ 626.-904-.912, Fla.Stat. (1987). See Citizens Ins. Co. v. Bowman, 525 So. 2d 991 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988). The question whether the insured’s policy was in force as of the date of the accident goes to the merits, not to jurisdiction.
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (21 total)
-
Heuss v. State, 687 So. 2d 823 (Fla. 1996)…52 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995), which expressly and directly conflicts with the opinions in Johnson v. State, 595 So. 2d 132 (Fla. 1st DCA), review denied, 601 So. 2d 553 (Fla.1992), Perkins v. State, 585 So. 2d 390 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991), and Taylor v. State, 557 So. 2d 138 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990). We have jurisdiction. Art. V, § 3(b)(3), Fla. Const. ISSUE The question in this case is whether or not an appellate court may engage sua sponte in a harmless error analysis. In Taylor, the First District Court of Appeal stated…
-
Matthews v. State, 584 So. 2d 1105 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991)…quired to advise the defendant that if his request to [*1107] discharge his attorney is granted, the court is not required to appoint substitute counsel and the defendant would be exercising his right to represent himself. Hardwick; Taylor v. State, 557 So. 2d 138 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990). At this point, if the defendant still desires to discharge his counsel, the court must determine whether the defendant is knowingly and intelligently waiving his right to court appointed counsel. Faretta v. California, 422 U.S.…
-
Lewis v. State, 623 So. 2d 1205 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993)…defendant is correct in his assertion; while the trial judge looked into counsel’s competency he failed to advise the defendant of the consequences of discharging his original counsel as required. The failure to advise is error. See Taylor v. State, 557 So. 2d 138 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990). However, this type of error is also subject to the harmless error test. In Taylor, the court concluded that it was unable to view the error as harmless because the state had not argued such. Here, too, the state fails to present…
Previewing 3 of 21 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Citizens Ins. Co. OF Am. v. Bowman, 525 So. 2d 991 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988)