ROBERT OFFER AND OFFER & ASSOCIATES INTERNATIONAL, INC., APPELLANTS,
v.
LADY ALICE CORP., A DELAWARE CORPORATION, ET AL., 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 court reversed a trial court's dismissal for lack of personal jurisdiction over Lady Alice Corp., a Delaware corporation that purchased a yacht in Florida. The court held that the defendant had sufficient minimum contacts with Florida through its tortious conduct in the state to support long-arm jurisdiction.
The court held that Florida has jurisdiction over Lady Alice Corp. because the alleged fraudulent exclusion of the broker constituted tortious conduct within Florida, and Jepson's activities in Florida were sufficient to satisfy minimum contacts required by due process.
[1] A defendant may be subject to long-arm jurisdiction in Florida for committing a tortious act within the state.
[2] Negotiating secretly to exclude a broker from a sale and commission can constitute tortious conduct for which a seller may be liable.
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“where seller and purchaser negotiate secretly and exclude broker from sale and commission, seller can be liable in tort”
Establishes that the alleged conduct could constitute tortious conduct under Florida law
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceRobert Offer, a Fort Lauderdale yacht broker, was contacted by Robert Jepson (owner of Lady Alice Corp., a Delaware corporation) about purchasing a ya…
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 cases and more on FLexlaw
KLEIN, Judge.
The trial court dismissed plaintiffs’ complaint because it concluded that defendant did not have minimum contacts with Florida so as to be amenable to suit here. We reverse.
Defendant Lady Alice Corp., a Delaware corporation, is wholly-owned by Robert Jep-son, a resident of Georgia. Plaintiff Robert Offer is a licensed yacht broker in Fort Lauderdale who received a telephone call from Jepson inquiring about a yacht which was in Fort Lauderdale for repairs. Jepson came to Florida twice to meet with Offer and inspect the yacht, and thereafter signed a contract to purchase the yacht for $7.25 million dollars, which was rejected. There were further negotiations between Jepson and the owner, through Offer; however, Jepson then wrote Offer and told him he was no longer interested in buying the yacht.
A few months later, unbeknownst to Offer, Jepson again came to Florida and took the yacht on a sea trial with a surveyor. Jepson thereafter had his corporation, Lady Alice, purchase the yacht for $6.5 million in a transaction in which a lower than usual broker’s commission was paid to a different broker. Offer brought this lawsuit against the seller, buyer, Jepson, and others on the theory that they fraudulently excluded him from participating in the sale and receiving a commission. The issue before us is whether Florida has jurisdiction over Lady Alice, the Delaware corporation which purchased the yacht.
Section 48.193(l)(b), Florida Statutes (1991) authorizes long-arm jurisdiction over a defendant committing a “tortious act within this state.”
The facts alleged here could constitute tortious conduct. Mead Corp. v. Mason, 191 So. 2d 592, 594 (Fla. 3d DCA 1966), cert. denied, 200 So. 2d 813 (Fla.1967) (where seller and purchaser negotiate secretly and exclude broker from sale and commission, seller can be liable in tort). And, the tortious conduct did occur in Florida. Tallmadge v. Mortgage Fin. Group, Inc., 625 So. 2d 1313 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993) (out-of-state borrower who applies for loan through Florida mortgage broker, but fails to pay commission, is subject to suit in Florida for breaching contract in Florida under section 48.193(l)(g)). Finally, Jepson’s activities in Florida were sufficient to satisfy the minimum contact requirement of due process. Tallmadge, citing Burger King Corp. v. Rudzewicz, 471 U.S. 462, 105 S.Ct. 2174, 85 L.Ed.2d 528 (1985).
We therefore reverse and remand for further proceedings.
STONE and PARIENTE, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
World Class Yachts, Inc. v. Murphy, 731 So. 2d 798 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999)…n of the jurisdictional issue. See Venetian Salami 554 So. 2d at 502. Should the trial court face this issue, we recommend it consider the factually similar cases of Offer v. Arison, 671 So. 2d 193 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996), and Offer v. Lady Alice Corp., 671 So. 2d 191 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996). REVERSED AND REMANDED. STEVENSON and TAYLOR, JJ., concur.…
-
Offer v. Arison, 671 So. 2d 193 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996)…urt entered its order of dismissal based on lack of personal jurisdiction after conducting an evidentiary hearing pursuant to Venetian Salami Co. v. Parthenais, 554 So. 2d 499 (Fla.1989). The sole issue in this case, as in Offer v. Lady Alice Corp., 671 So. 2d 191 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996), is whether the two prongs neeessary for asserting personal jurisdiction were met: 1) sufficient facts to bring defendant within Florida’s long arm statute; and 2) sufficient facts to constitute minimum contacts with the forum. S…
Authorities Cited
- Burger King Corp. v. Rudzewicz, 471 U.S. 462 (U.S. 1985)
- The Mead Corp. v. Mason, 191 So. 2d 592 (Fla. 3d DCA 1966)
- Kohly v. Royal Indem. Co., 200 So. 2d 813 (Fla. 1967)
- Male v. State, 200 So. 2d 813 (Fla. 1967)
- Tallmadge v. Mortg. Fin. Grp., Inc., 625 So. 2d 1313 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993)