JOHN CHRISTOPHER POE AND KIMBERLY J. POE, APPELLANTS,
v.
THE MARINE GROUP OF PALM BEACH, INC., A FLORIDA CORPORATION, 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.
The Fourth District Court of Appeal reversed a trial court's denial of a motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction in a breach of contract case involving a vessel sales listing agreement. Although the court found the jurisdictional allegations sufficient under Florida's long-arm statute, it held the trial court erred by failing to conduct an evidentiary hearing on whether minimum contacts with Florida satisfied constitutional due process requirements.
Although the jurisdictional allegations were sufficient under Florida's long-arm statute (section 48.193(1)(g)), the trial court erred in denying the motion to dismiss without holding an evidentiary hearing to determine whether the defendants had minimum contacts with Florida sufficient to satisfy constitutional due process requirements.
[1] A trial court must hold an evidentiary hearing on disputed issues of minimum contacts when a defendant moves to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction.
[2] Allegations of a defendant's failure to perform contractual acts required in Florida are sufficient to invoke long-arm jurisdiction under Florida Statutes section 48.193(…
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“The jurisdictional allegations by appellee were sufficient under section 48.193(l)(g), Florida Statutes (1997)(applying long-arm jurisdiction to claims of breach of contract where it is alleged that the defendants failed to perform acts required by the contract to be performed in this state), and were not directly factually disputed by the Poes' affidavit.”
Establishes that the long-arm statute provided a basis for jurisdiction even though the defendants were out-of-state residents.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe Marine Group of Palm Beach, Inc., a Florida corporation, entered into an exclusive listing agreement with John and Kimberly Poe, Maryland resident…
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 Long Arm Statute cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
This is an appeal from a non-final order of the circuit court which denied the defendants’ motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction. The lawsuit arises from a contract between The Marine Group of Palm Beach, Inc., a Florida corporation, and the appellants, John and Kimberly Poe, residents of Maryland, wherein the Poes allegedly gave The Marine Group the exclusive right to sell a 31-foot vessel in exchange for a 10% commission. The lawsuit alleged that John Poe notified The Marine Group of his intention to terminate the listing agreement and to keep the vessel rather than sell it, but that the Poes later sold the vessel to a third party, thereby breaching the contract to pay The Marine Group a sales commission. The Poes are full-time residents of Maryland where the vessel is, and has been, located. The lawsuit alleges that pursuant to the terms of the contract, certain acts were to be performed by both parties in Florida in furtherance of the contract.
We reverse. The jurisdictional allegations by appellee were sufficient under section 48.193(l)(g), Florida Statutes (1997)(applying long-arm jurisdiction to claims of breach of contract where it is alleged that the defendants failed to perform acts required by the contract to be performed in this state), and were not directly factually disputed by the Poes’ affidavit. But, the trial court erred in failing to hold an evidentiary hearing on the disputed issues concerning whether there were sufficient minimum contacts with the State of Florida to satisfy due process requirements in having the case litigated here. See Burger King Corp. v. Rudzewicz, 471 U.S. 462, 105 S.Ct. 2174, 85 L.Ed.2d 528 (1985); Venetian Salami Co. v. Parthenais, 554 So. 2d 499, 502 (Fla.1989); QSR, Inc. v. Concord Food Festival Inc., No. 4D99-0284, 2000 WL 173752, — So. 2d - (Fla. 4th DCA Feb.16, 2000); World Class Yachts, Inc. v. Murphy, 731 So. 2d 798 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999); Washington Capital Corp. v. Milandco, Ltd., Inc., 695 So. 2d 838 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997).
Reversed and remanded for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.
STONE, STEVENSON and HAZOURI, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
LAW Offs. OF Sybil Shainwald v. Barro, 817 So. 2d 873 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002)…s exist. Therefore, the trial court erred in not conducting an evidentiary hearing. Venetian Salami; Clarkson; John Posey; see also QSR, Inc. v. Concord Food Festival Inc., 766 So. 2d 271 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000); Poe v. Marine Group of Palm Beach, Inc., 760 So. 2d 273 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000); Meuers & Assocs., P.A. v. Heger, 752 So. 2d 3 (Fla. 2d DCA), rev. denied, 767 So. 2d 457 (Fla. 2000); Mowrey Elevator Co. of Fla., Inc. v. Automated Integration, Inc., 745 So. 2d 1046 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999). Accordingly, we reverse…
-
Smith Architectural Grp., Inc. v. Christel Dehaan, 867 So. 2d 434 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004)…refinancing of a mortgage on a California property and closing was held in California, but commission agreement as well as all loan documents, correspondence, and checks were sent to broker’s Florida office); Poe v. Marine Group of Palm Beach, Inc., 760 So. 2d 273, 274 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000) (Florida long-arm statute requirements met where Maryland residents gave Florida corporation exclusive right to sell yacht located in Maryland in exchange for commission and contract required some action by both parties in F…
-
Stomar, Inc. v. Lucky Seven Riverboat Co., L.L.C., 821 So. 2d 1183 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002)…rida’s long-arm statute.2 See § 48.193(1)(g), Fla. Stat. (2000). Plaintiff alleged that Lucky Seven breached the parties’ brokerage agreement by failing to pay the commission owed to plaintiff in Florida. See Poe v. Marine Group of Palm Beach, Inc., 760 So. 2d 273, 274 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000); Tallmadge v. Mortgage Fin. Group, Inc., 625 So. 2d 1313, 1313 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993). The record of the evidentiary hearing with conflicting facts resolved in favor of the trial court’s decision also shows facts sufficient to…
Previewing 3 of 4 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)
- Wash. Cap. Corp. & Jack Wolgin v. Milandco, Ltd., Inc., 695 So. 2d 838 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997)
- World Class Yachts, Inc. v. Murphy, 731 So. 2d 798 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999)