JOSE EMILIO BRUZZONE ROLDOS, APPELLANT,
v.
AMERICARGO LINES, INC., APPELLEE
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.
Jose Emilio Bruzzone Roldos, an Ecuadorian citizen, appeals the denial of his motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction and forum non conveniens in a contract dispute with a Florida corporation. The court reversed, holding that a nonresident defendant's purchases of goods from a Florida seller and payments made through a Florida bank account are insufficient minimum contacts to establish personal jurisdiction.
The court held that the nonresident defendant lacked sufficient minimum contacts with Florida to establish personal jurisdiction. The mere purchase of goods from a Florida seller, without more, combined with payments made through a Florida bank account, does not satisfy the due process requirement for minimum contacts.
[1] Personal jurisdiction over a nonresident defendant in Florida requires the defendant to have performed an act enumerated in the Florida long-arm statute and to possess su…
[2] A contract alone is generally insufficient to establish minimum contacts with a forum state for purposes of personal jurisdiction over an out-of-state party.
Previewing 2 of 5 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“In order to sustain personal jurisdiction over a nonresident defendant in Florida, a defendant must perform one of the acts enumerated in the Florida long-arm statute and must also have sufficient minimum contacts with Florida so as to satisfy the due process clause requirement.”
Establishes the two-prong test for personal jurisdiction over nonresidents
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceBruzzone, an Ecuadorian citizen, entered into an oral agreement with Americargo Lines, Inc., a Florida corporation, for the purchase and shipment of f…
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 Florida Long Arm Statute cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
The defendant, Jose Emilio Bruzzone Roí-dos, appeals from a non-final order denying his motion to dismiss based on lack of personal jurisdiction and forum non conveniens. We reverse.
In the underlying ease, Jose Emilio Bruz-zone Roídos, an Ecuadorian citizen, entered into an oral agreement with Americargo Lines, Inc. [Americargo], a Florida corporation, for the purchase and shipment of frozen meats to Ecuador. Americargo brought suit against Bruzzone alleging that he had failed to pay for a portion of these shipments. Bruzzone moved to dismiss the suit based on lack of personal jurisdiction and forum non conveniens. After conducting an evidentiary hearing, the trial court denied the motion. Bruzzone’s appeal follows.
Bruzzone contends that, as a nonresident defendant, he lacks sufficient minimum contacts with Florida so as to confer personal jurisdiction. We agree.
“In order to sustain personal jurisdiction over a nonresident defendant in Florida, a defendant must perform one of the acts enumerated in the Florida long-arm statute and must also have sufficient minimum contacts with Florida so as to satisfy the due process clause requirement.” O’Brien Glass Co. v. Miami Wall Systems, Inc., 645 So. 2d 142, 143 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994)(emphasis in original)(citing Venetian Salami Co. v. Parthenais, 554 So. 2d 499, 503 (Fla.1989)). “In Burger King Corp. v. Rudzewicz, 471 U.S. 462, 105 S.Ct. 2174, 85 L.Ed.2d 528 (1985), the Supreme Court found that a contract alone was not sufficient to establish minimum contacts with the forum state so as to allow the out-of-state party to be sued in the forum state.” Alan Richard Textiles, Ltd. v. Vertilux, Inc., 627 So. 2d 529, 530 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993).
Consequently, this Court has consistently found that the mere purchase of goods within the State of Florida by a nonresident, without more, is insufficient to satisfy the due process requirement of minimum contacts. Marsh Supermarkets, Inc. v. Queen’s Flowers Corp., 696 So. 2d 1207, 1209 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997)(holding that nonresident defendant’s purchases from Florida vendor and alleged failure to make payments in Florida were insufficient to establish minimum contacts with Florida); O’Brien Glass, 645 So. 2d at 144 (holding that Illinois corporation that purchased goods from Florida manufacturer lacked sufficient minimum contacts with Florida where purchaser did not conduct business in Florida and only contact was that payment was due in Florida); Alan Richard Textiles, 627 So. 2d at 530 (holding that New York corporation that regularly ordered goods from Florida corporation lacked sufficient minimum contacts with Florida where purchaser did not have presence in, or do business, in Florida); Payless Drug Stores Northwest, Inc. v. Innovative Clothing Exchange, Inc., 615 So. 2d 249, 250 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993)(holding that nonresident buyer that placed two orders in Florida and arranged for payment to be due in Florida did not have sufficient minimum contacts with Florida).
Additionally, Florida courts have also repeatedly held that the nonpayment of a debt that is due in Florida, without more, is not a sufficient minimum contact to sustain personal jurisdiction. Venetian Salami, 554 So. 2d at 503; O’Brien Glass, 645 So. 2d at 144; Alan Richard Textiles, 627 So. 2d at 530; Payless Drug Stores, 615 So. 2d at 250-51.
In the instant ease, the undisputed facts show that the nonresident defendant, Bruz-zone, purchased goods at regular intervals from Americargo and that Americargo shipped them to Ecuador. Although the parties disagree as to where payment was due, the evidence shows that payments were consistently made in Miami through a corresponding bank account. Based on the foregoing authority, we find that this, without more, is insufficient to satisfy the due process requirement of minimum contacts so as to confer personal jurisdiction. Accordingly, we reverse the order under review.
Because this issue is dispositive, we do not address the other issue raised by the appellant.
Reversed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
deMCO Techs., Inc. v. C.S. Engineered Castings, Inc., 769 So. 2d 1128 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000)…rsonal jurisdiction over a nonresident defendant. See Blankenship v. Interim Servs., Inc., 700 So. 2d 429, 432 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997) (failure to pay under the terms of a license, franchise and loan agreement); Bruzzone Roldos v. Americargo Lines, Inc., 698 So. 2d 1368, 1369-70 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997) (failure to pay for frozen meat); Marsh Supermarkets, 696 So. 2d 1207 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997) (failure to pay for flowers); O’Brien Glass Co. v. Miami Wall Sys., Inc., 645 So. 2d 142, 143 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994) (failure to pay for…
-
Blankenship v. Interim Servs., Inc., 700 So. 2d 429 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997)…stantially more, to establish the minimum contacts with the forum state also required, under the due process clause, to support service on a nonresident. Venetian Salami Co. v. Parthenais, 554 So. 2d 499 (Fla.1989); Roldos v. Americargo Lines, Inc., 698 So. 2d 1368 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997); Marsh Supermarkets, Inc. v. Queen’s Flowers Corp., 696 So. 2d 1207 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997); O’Brien Glass Co. v. Miami Wall Sys., Inc., 645 So. 2d 142 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994); Pres-Kap, Inc. v. System One, Direct Access, Inc., 636 So. 2d 1…
-
EOS Transp. Inc. v. Agri-Source Fuels LLC, 37 So. 3d 349 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010)…to pay alone are not sufficient to establish minimum contacts with the forum state to satisfy due process. See, e.g., Marsh Supermarkets, Inc., v. Queen’s Flowers Corp., 696 So. 2d 1207 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997); Bruzzone Roldos v. Americargo Lines, Inc., 698 So. 2d 1368 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997); Aluminator Trailers, L.L.C. v. Loadmaster Aluminum Boat Trailers, Inc., 832 So. 2d 822 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002). In addition, the “due process requirement of minimum contacts is not satisfied by a showing that a party has entered into…
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
- Burger King Corp. v. Rudzewicz, 471 U.S. 462 (U.S. 1985)
- Venetian Salami Co. v. J.S. Parthenais, 554 So. 2d 499 (Fla. 1989)
- Marsh Supermarkets, Inc. v. The Queen's Flowers Corp., 696 So. 2d 1207 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997)
- O'Brien Glass Co. v. Miami Wall Sys., Inc., 645 So. 2d 142 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994)
- Payless Drug Stores Nw., Inc. v. Innovative Clothing Exch., Inc., 615 So. 2d 249 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993)
- Alan Richard Textiles, Ltd. v. Vertilux, Inc., 627 So. 2d 529 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993)
- Prenoveau v. First Cmty. Bank OF Orange City, 627 So. 2d 529 (Fla. 5th DCA 1993)