GLENEAGLE SHIP MANAGEMENT CO., A FOREIGN CORPORATION, AND CHESAPEAKE SHIPPING, INC., A FOREIGN CORPORATION, PETITIONERS,
v.
ANTHONY LEONDAKOS AND CAROL LEONDAKOS, HIS WIFE, RESPONDENTS
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.
Gleneagle Ship Management sought to prevent discovery pending resolution of its motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction in a Jones Act maritime injury lawsuit. The Florida appellate court held that parties may conduct limited discovery on jurisdictional issues even before jurisdictional questions are finally resolved, declining to follow a conflicting Third District precedent.
The court held that 'jurisdictional discovery' is available during the pendency of jurisdictional issues, subject to the trial court's supervision. The court declined to adopt the contrary rule from F. Hoffmann La-Roche & Co., Ltd. v. Felix that would prevent discovery until jurisdiction is finally determined.
[1] Jurisdictional discovery is available during the pendency of jurisdictional issues, subject to the supervision of the trial court.
[2] A court may permit discovery related to jurisdiction even before jurisdictional questions are finally determined.
Previewing 2 of 3 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“a defendant does not become a 'party' for purposes of discovery until jurisdictional questions are 'finally determined.'”
The rule from F. Hoffmann La-Roche that the court declined to adopt, which would have prevented jurisdictional discovery.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAnthony Leondakos sued Gleneagle Ship Management under the Jones Act alleging he suffered physical injury when he fell off a stairwell on a vessel ope…
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 Discovery cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Gleneagle Ship Management Co. (Glen-eagle) petitions this court for a writ of certiorari to review a discovery order entered by the circuit court. We deny the petition.
Gleneagle is being sued under the Jones Act, 46 U.S.C.App. § 688, by respondent Anthony Leondakos. In his complaint Leondakos alleges that he suffered physical injury when he fell off a stairwell on the vessel Bridgeton, which was then operating in the Persian Gulf. Leondakos contends the stairwell was negligently maintained. Although the complaint sufficiently alleges personal jurisdiction, Gleneagle has moved to dismiss the complaint on the theory that the court below is without jurisdiction.
Before the motion to dismiss could be heard Leondakos served the discovery request that is the subject of this petition for certiorari. The discovery request relates only to the issue of jurisdiction, not to the merits of the ease. Gleneagle argues that this is a distinction without a difference. Its primary authority is F. Hoffmann La-Roche & Co., Ltd. v. Felix, 512 So. 2d 997 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987). Under facts somewhat similar to the present case, the court in Hoffmann LaRoche found that a defendant does not become a “party” for purposes of discovery until jurisdictional questions are “finally determined.”
We decline to adopt the holding in Hoff-mann LaRoche. Notably, that panel expressed a preference for the policy followed in the federal judicial system, which would permit the limited scope of discovery contemplated by Leondakos in this case. See Oppenheimer Fund, Inc. v. Sanders, 437 U.S. 340, 351 n. 13, 98 S.Ct. 2380, 2390 n. 13, 57 L.Ed.2d 253, 265 n. 13 (1978), and other authorities cited in Hoffmann LaRoche at 512 So. 2d 998 n. 3. The panel apparently considered itself bound by a previous decision of the same court, Far Out Music, Inc. v. Jordan, 438 So. 2d 912 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983), and lacked support for revisiting that decision en banc.
We believe the federal rule represents the better approach to the question, and hold that “jurisdictional discovery” is available during the pendency of jurisdictional issues, subject of course to the supervision of the trial court.
Petition denied.
RYDER, A.C.J., and DANAHY and PARKER, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Gleneagle Ship Mgmt. Co. v. Leondakos, 602 So. 2d 1282 (Fla. 1992)…HARDING, Justice. We have for review Gleneagle Ship Management Co. v. Leondakos, 581 So. 2d 222 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991), based on express and direct conflict with F. Hoffmann LaRoche & Co. v. Felix, 512 So. 2d 997 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987). We have jurisdiction based on article V, section 3(b)(3) of the Florida Constitution. The issue here is whether dis…
Authorities Cited
- Oppenheimer Fund, Inc. v. Sanders, 437 U.S. 340 (U.S. 1978)
- FAR OUT Music, Inc. v. Jordan, 438 So. 2d 912 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983)
- F. Hoffmann LaROCHE & Co., Ltd. v. Felix, 512 So. 2d 997 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987)