AVIS RENT A CAR SYSTEM, INC., APPELLANT,
v.
KENNETH J. BROUGHTON AND LESTER GILKEY AS CO-PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ESTATE OF JERRY GILKEY, DECEASED, 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.
Avis Rent A Car System appealed the trial court's denial of its motion to change venue from Broward County to Brevard County in a wrongful death action. The Fourth District Court of Appeal reversed, holding that the trial court abused its discretion by denying the venue change when the only connection to Broward County was Avis's registered agent there.
The trial court abused its discretion in denying the motion to change venue. When a nonresident corporation's only connection to the county where an action is filed is the presence of a registered agent there, the trial court should grant a motion to change venue to the county where the cause of action arose.
[1] A trial court abuses its discretion by denying a motion for change of venue when the only connection to the county where the action is filed is the presence of a register…
[2] The convenience of parties and witnesses is a primary consideration in venue determinations, and the location where the cause of action arose is a significant factor.
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“the trial court abuses its discretion in denying a motion for change of venue when the only connection to the county in which the action is filed is the fact that the nonresident corporation has an agent there”
Establishes the core legal principle that a corporation's mere registered agent in a county is insufficient to establish proper venue when the cause of action arose elsewhere.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceA wrongful death accident occurred in Brevard County, Florida. The decedent and his family were residents of Maine; the individual defendants were fro…
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 Venue Statutes cases and more on FLexlaw
WARNER, Judge.
Appellees brought a wrongful death action in Broward County involving an accident which occurred in Brevard County. The appellant unsuccessfully moved the trial court to change venue from Broward County to Brevard County on forum non conveniens grounds. We reverse.
The decedent and his family were all residents of Maine. The individual defendants were residents of Pennsylvania. One eyewitness was from Georgia, and the remainder of the persons likely to testify regarding the incident were members of the Brevard Sheriffs Office who investigated the accident as well as medical personnel located in Brevard County. The only connection to Broward County is the fact that the corporate defendant has a registered agent in that county.
We reverse the trial court’s denial of the motion to change venue pursuant to section 47.122, Florida Statutes (1995), under the authority of Braun v. Stafford, 529 So. 2d 735 (Fla. 4th DCA 1988); Hughes Supply, Inc. v. Pearl, 403 So. 2d 614 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981); Hertz Corp. v. Rentz, 326 So. 2d 216 (Fla. 4th DCA 1976); Peterson, Howell & Heather v. O’Neill, 314 So. 2d 808 (Fla. 3d DCA 1975), all of which hold that the trial court abuses its discretion in denying a motion for change of venue when the only connection to the county in which the action is filed is the fact that the nonresident corporation has an agent there. Appellees contend that because most of the witnesses and the plaintiffs are from out of state, it will be more convenient for most of the witnesses and plaintiffs to travel to Fort Lauderdale rather than to Brevard County. This convenience argument was rejected in Peterson, which stated:
While we must concur that transportation facilities are generally better in metropolitan areas, we cannot recognize it as a rule of practice that it is always more convenient for parties to have their lawsuit tried in such areas. If this were so, it might follow that every lawsuit involving some out-of-state parties would be better tried in a metropolitan area. We think that it was the purpose of the venue statutes, that the lawsuit should be tried in the area where the cause of action arose whenever consonant with the residence and convenience of the parties.
Id. at 810 (citations omitted).
For these reasons, we reverse and remand with directions that the court transfer this case to Brevard County.
DELL and FARMER, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp. v. Young, 690 So. 2d 1377 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997)…in the interest of justice Duval Comity might be the appropriate forum. See Hu, 426 So. 2d at 1281. Appellant’s reliance upon Inter-American Sunbelt Corp. v. Borozny, 512 So. 2d 287 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987) and Avis Rent A Car System, Inc. v. Broughton, 672 So. 2d 656 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996), is misplaced. Both Borozny and Broughton are distinguishable. Both cases involved automobile accidents which occurred in Florida counties other than in the forum county and in both cases many witnesses were located in the county…
-
Morrill v. Lytle, 893 So. 2d 671 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005)
-
ATP Tour, Inc. v. Horst Skoff, 758 So. 2d 1226 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000)…t abuses its discretion if it denies a motion to change venue where the only connection to the county in which the action is filed is that a non-resident corporation had an agent for service there. See, e.g., Avis Rent A Car Sys., Inc. v. Broughton, 672 So. 2d 656 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996); Braun v. Stafford, 529 So. 2d 735 (Fla. 4th DCA 1988); Hughes Supply, Inc. v. Pearl, 403 So. 2d 614 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981); Hertz Corp. v. Rentz, 326 So. 2d 216 (Fla. 4th DCA 1976); Peterson, Howell & Heather v. O’Neill, 314 So. 2d…
Previewing 3 of 7 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Peterson v. O'Neill, 314 So. 2d 808 (Fla. 3d DCA 1975)
- S.C. Ins. Co. v. Pasalodos, 326 So. 2d 216 (Fla. 4th DCA 1976)
- The HERTZ Corp. v. Rentz, 326 So. 2d 216 (Fla. 4th DCA 1976)
- Hughes Supply, Inc. v. Pearl, 403 So. 2d 614 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981)
- Braun v. Stafford, 529 So. 2d 735 (Fla. 4th DCA 1988)