ADVANCED PRODUCTS, INC., APPELLANT,
v.
OXYORGANICS, INC., APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Breach Of Promissory Note cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Advanced Products, Inc. (Advanced) appeals the final judgment entered against it in an action for breach of promissory note filed by Oxyorganics, Inc. (Oxyorganics). Advanced alleges that the trial court erred in denying its motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction. We agree and reverse.
Oxyorganics alleged in its complaint that the promissory note was executed and delivered in Florida. However, Advanced accompanied its motion to dismiss with an affidavit challenging the jurisdictional allegation of the complaint. This shifted the burden to Oxyorganics to prove by affidavit the basis for jurisdiction in Florida. See Venetian Salami Co. v. Parthenais, 554 So. 2d 499, 502 (Fla.1989). Oxyorganics filed no counteraffidavits. Thus, Advanced was entitled to dismissal for lack of personal jurisdiction. See id.
Accordingly, we reverse the judgment entered in favor of Oxyorganics with directions to dismiss its complaint in this case for lack of jurisdiction.
Reversed and remanded with directions.
FULMER, C.J., and WHATLEY and NORTHCUTT, JJ., Concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Pizzo v. State, 945 So. 2d 1203 (Fla. 2006)…BELL, J. James Pizzo seeks review of the decision of the Second District Court of Appeal in Pizzo v. State, 916 So. 2d 828 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005), on the ground that it expressly and directly conflicts with the decision of the Fifth District Court of Appeal in Donovan v. State, 572 So. 2d 522 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990).1 The district courts are in conflict regarding the proper ana…1 / 4
-
Zamir Garzon v. State, 980 So. 2d 1038 (Fla. 2008)…nstruction held not fundamental error because not [*1043] used as to a disputed issue); Tolbert v. State, 922 So. 2d 1013 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006) (use of “and/or” found not fundamental error because codefendant acquitted of all charges); Pizzo v. State, 916 So. 2d 828 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005) (use of “and/or”), quashed on other grounds, 945 So. 2d 1203 (Fla.2006); Davis v. State, 895 So. 2d 1195 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005) (use of "and/or”); Randolph v. State, 903 So. 2d 264 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005) (codefendant to Davis); Zeno v. St…
-
State v. Tuttle, 177 So. 3d 1246 (Fla. 2015)…lesser offense should be determined: that is, whether the elements of grand theft should be compared to the elements of organized fraud, Donovan, 572 So. 2d 522, or whether. the punishments for the two offenses should be compared, Pizzo [v. State], 916 So. 2d 828 [ (Fla. 2nd DCA 2005) ]. Id. at 1206. In Donovan, the Fifth District held that convictions for both grand theft and organized1 fraud violated double jeopardy and section 775.021(4)(b)3., Florida Statutes (1987), because the elements of grand theft…
Previewing 3 of 8 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)