CAPITAL ONE FINANCIAL CORPORATION, APPELLANT,
v.
LARRY C. MILLER, 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.
Capital One Financial Corporation, a non-Florida holding company, appealed a trial court's denial of its motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction in a breach of contract case. The court reversed, holding that the presence of a subsidiary in Florida is insufficient to subject a non-Florida parent corporation to long-arm jurisdiction without additional facts establishing minimum contacts.
The court reversed and held that the presence of a subsidiary corporation within Florida is not sufficient, without more, to subject a non-Florida parent corporation to long-arm jurisdiction in Florida. Where a defendant files an adequate affidavit contesting jurisdiction and the plaintiff fails to file an opposing affidavit or provide sworn allegations, the complaint must be dismissed for lack of personal jurisdiction.
[1] A parent corporation is not subject to long-arm jurisdiction in Florida merely because its subsidiary corporation does business in Florida.
[2] When a defendant contests personal jurisdiction by filing an affidavit, the burden shifts to the plaintiff to prove jurisdiction by affidavit.
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 presence of a subsidiary corporation within Florida is not enough, without more, to subject a non-Florida parent corporation to long-arm jurisdiction within Florida”
Establishes the core holding that corporate relationship alone does not establish personal jurisdiction
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceMiller filed an unsworn complaint alleging breach of a 1995 contract by Signet Bank/Virginia, naming both Signet Bank/Virginia and Capital One Financi…
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 Challenges cases and more on FLexlaw
DOYEL, ROBERT L., Associate Judge.
A corporation foreign to Florida challenges an order denying its motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction. We reverse.
For a determination of this matter, there is an unsworn complaint and an affidavit in support of the appellant’s motion to dismiss. The complaint alleges breach of a 1995 contract by Signet Bank/Virginia. It names Signet Bank/Virginia and the appellant as defendants. The appellee has filed nothing more than the unsworn complaint. The affiant is Frank G. LaPrade, III, the assistant general counsel for the appellant.. The allegations in the LaPrade affidavit are that the appellant is a holding company only and conducts no business; that it owns all of the stock (except directors’ qualifying shares) of Capital One Bank, which bought “substantially all” of the assets and liabilities of Signet Bank/Virginia in 1994.
Capital One Bank apparently does business in Florida. However, the presence of a subsidiary corporation within Florida is not enough, without more, to subject a non-Florida parent corporation to long-arm jurisdiction within Florida. See Flight Int'l Aviation Training Ctr. v. Rivera, 651 So. 2d 1265 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995).
The rule to be applied here is the rule stated in Venetian Salami Co. v. Parthenais, 554 So. 2d 499 (Fla.1989). In that case the supreme court said:
A defendant wishing to contest the allegations of the complaint concerning jurisdiction or to raise a contention of minimum contacts must file affidavits in support of his position. The burden is then placed upon the plaintiff to prove by affidavit the basis upon which jurisdiction may be obtained.
Id. at 502.
As we have pointed out, the appel-lee filed no affidavit in opposition to the affidavit submitted by the appellant. A plaintiff may be excused from the requirement of filing an opposing affidavit only “when the nonresident defendant’s affidavit does not sufficiently refute the jurisdictional allegations.” See Lampe v. Hoyne, 652 So. 2d 424, 426 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995). Otherwise, the facts submitted in the sworn affidavits must be taken as true; and the complaint should be dismissed. See Williamsburg Vacations, Inc. v. Lee, 664 So. 2d 1044 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995). The appellant’s affidavit was adequate. The appellee filed no opposing affidavit and his complaint is unsworn. Therefore, the trial court erred in denying the motion of the appellant to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction.
Reversed.
FRANK, A.C.J., and QUINCE, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Hilltopper Holding Corp. & Centennial Healthcare Corp. v. Est. OF Cheryl Cutchin, 955 So. 2d 598 (Fla. 2d DCA 2007)…ient, the defendant’s affidavit must contain factual allegations which, if taken as true, show that the defendant’s conduct does not subject him to jurisdiction. Acquadro v. Bergeron, 851 So. 2d 665, 672 (Fla.2003); Capital One Fin. Corp. v. Miller, 709 So. 2d 639, 640 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998) (noting that the facts in the defendant’s sworn affidavit are to be taken as true in determining whether the burden shifts to the plaintiff to prove jurisdiction). At this stage, the defendant’s affidavit must contest only th…
-
Res. Healthcare OF Am., Inc. v. McKINNEY, 940 So. 2d 1139 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006)…see of a nursing home located within the state did not constitute activity sufficient to grant personal jurisdiction over parent corporation, even though parent corporation was disclosed on state licensure filings); Capital One Fin. Corp. v. Miller, 709 So. 2d 639, 640 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998) (finding foreign holding company’s ownership of subsidiary within the state insufficient to satisfy the long-arm statute); Walt Disney Co. v. Nelson, 677 So. 2d 400, 403 (Fla. 5th DCA 1996) (holding parent corporation’s owner…
-
Greystone Tribeca Acquisition, L.L.C. v. Ronstrom, 863 So. 2d 473 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004)…embers of Greystone. Florida decisions have held that the presence of a subsidiary corporation within Florida is not enough to subject a non-Florida parent corporation to long-arm jurisdiction within this state. See Capital One Fin. Corp. v. Miller, 709 So. 2d 639 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998); Phillips v. Orange Co., 522 So. 2d 64 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988); Qualley v. Int’l Air Serv. Co., 595 So. 2d 194 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992); McLean Fin. Corp. v. Winslow Loudermilk Corp., 509 So. 2d 1373 (Fla. 5th DCA 1987). Thus Ronstrom’s reli…
Previewing 3 of 9 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Venetian Salami Co. v. J.S. Parthenais, 554 So. 2d 499 (Fla. 1989)
- Lampe v. Hoyne, 652 So. 2d 424 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995)
- Flight Int'l Aviation Training Ctr., Inc. v. Rivera, 651 So. 2d 1265 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995)
- Williamsburg Vacations, Inc. v. LEE, 664 So. 2d 1044 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995)