GRUPO RADIO CENTRO S.A.B. DE C.V., ETC., APPELLANT,
v.
AMERICAN MERCHANT BANKING GROUP, INC. AND SPANISH RADIO PRODUCTIONS, INC., 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.
Grupo Radio Centro appealed the denial of its motion to quash service of process in a contract dispute. The court reversed, finding that service was improper because the summons failed to comply with the Hague Convention's requirements for service in Mexico by not specifying whether the response time was in business days or calendar days.
Service of process was improper and the motion to quash should have been granted because the summons did not comply with the mandatory requirements of the Hague Convention applicable to service in Mexico.
[1] Service of process under the Hague Convention is mandatory in all cases to which it applies.
[2] The Hague Convention preempts inconsistent methods of service prescribed by state law.
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“The Hague Convention is a multilateral treaty that was formulated in 1964 ... to provide a simpler way to serve process abroad, to assure that the defendants sued in foreign jurisdictions would receive actual and timely notice of suit, and to facilitate proof of service abroad.”
Establishes the purpose and scope of the Hague Convention
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAmerican Merchant Banking Group filed suit against Grupo Radio in February 2010 seeking compensation for consulting services allegedly performed under…
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.
Grupo Radio S.A.B. de C.V. appeals the denial of its motion to quash service of process and dismissal of the amended complaint. We reverse and remand because service of process was improper.
American Merchant Banking Group Inc. filed suit in February, 2010, against Grupo Radio and its subsidiary, Grupo Radio L.A., seeking compensation for consulting services American allegedly performed pursuant to an oral contract. American originally served only Grupo Radio L.A., believing that Grupo Radio L.A. served as an agent for Grupo Radio. Since American lacked evidence that Grupo Radio exercised exclusive control over Grupo Radio L.A., American lacked evidence of agency. American therefore attempted service on Grupo Radio in Mexico under the Hague Convention, using a foreign process to issue an alias summons.
However, the summons was deficient under the requirements of the Hague Convention, to which Mexico is a signatory, because it did not state whether Grupo Radio’s required response time was calculated in business days or calendar days. This specification is required for proper service under the Hague Convention in Mexico.1 “The Hague Convention is a multilateral treaty that was formulated in 1964 ... to provide a simpler way to serve process abroad, to assure that the defendants sued in foreign jurisdictions would receive actual and timely notice of suit, and to facilitate proof of service abroad.” Volkswagenwerk AG v. Schlunk, 486 U.S. 694, 698, 108 S.Ct. 2104, 100 L.Ed.2d 722 (1988). The Hague Convention “preempts inconsistent methods of service prescribed by state law.” Id. at 699, 108 S.Ct. 2104. Moreover, the United States Supreme Court has held that the Hague Convention “is mandatory in all cases to which it applies.” Id. at 705, 108 S.Ct. 2104.
In Florida, the Hague Convention applies in all cases “where there is occasion to transmit a judicial or extrajudicial document for service abroad.” Chabert v. Bacquie, 694 So.2d 805, 812 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997). American thus is subject to the requirements of the Hague Convention, and it may easily amend its alias summons to add the single word which would make the summons proper.
*152Accordingly, we reverse the trial court’s denial of the motion to quash and dismissal of the complaint, and remand the cause for proper service.
Reversed and remanded.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Ingenieria Y Exportacion de Tecnologia S.L. v. Freytech, Inc., 210 So. 3d 211 (Fla. 3d DCA 2016)…nd is thus appealable.”). “In Florida, the Hague Convention applies in all cases ‘where there is occasion to transmit a judicial or extrajudicial document for service abroad.”’ Grupo Radio Centro S.A.B. de C.V. v. Am. Merchant Banking Group, Inc., 71 So. 3d 151, 151 (Fla. 3d DCA 2011) (quoting Chabert v. Bacquie, 694 So. 2d 805, 812 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997)); see § 48.194(1), Fla. Stat. (2016). Here, the trial found that Freytech, Inc., the plaintiff below, had sufficiently served Inexa in Spain under Article 1…
-
Portalp Int'l SAS v. Zuloaga, 198 So. 3d 669 (Fla. 2d DCA 2015)…il or Commercial Matters.” “In Florida, the Hague Convention applies in all cases..‘where there is occasion to transmit a judicial or extrajudicial document . for service abroad.’ ” Grupo Radio Centro S.A.B. de C.V. v. Am. Merck. Banking Grp., Inc., 71 So. 3d 151, 151 (Fla. 3d DCA 2011) (quoting Chabert v. Bacquie, 694 So. 2d 805, 812 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997)); see SDS-IC v. Fla. Concentrates Int’l, LLC, 157 So. 3d 389, 391 (Fla. 2d DCA 2015) (“Article 1 of the Hague Convention provides that it ‘shall apply in al…
-
Cornejo v. Jonhatan Antonio Garcia Reyes (Fla. 4th DCA 2025)
Authorities Cited
- Volkswagenwerk Aktiengesellschaft v. Schlunk, 486 U.S. 694 (U.S. 1988)
- Robbins v. City OF Tallahassee & Leon Cnty., 694 So. 2d 805 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997)