CORNERSTONE INVESTMENT FUNDING, LLC, APPELLANT,
v.
PAINTED POST GROUP, 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.
A defendant's mere failure to pay on a contract requiring payment in Florida does not, by itself, establish sufficient minimum contacts with the state to satisfy due process for personal jurisdiction.
[1] Personal jurisdiction over a nonresident defendant requires satisfaction of both Florida's long-arm statute and the minimum contacts test to ensure fair play and substant…
[2] Breaching a contract by failing to make payments in Florida, without more, does not establish sufficient minimum contacts with the state to satisfy due process.
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 intelligenceAppellant, a Virginia entity, challenged Florida's personal jurisdiction after being sued for breach of contract on a promissory note. The trial court…
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 Purposeful Availment cases and more on FLexlaw
ON MOTION FOR REHEARING
We grant the Motion for Rehearing filed by Appellee Painted Post Group, withdraw our previously issued opinion dated January 27, 2016, and replace it with the following:
Appellant, Cornerstone Investment Funding, LLC (“Cornerstone”), a Virginia-based entity, appeals the trial court’s denial of its motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction.1 We reverse, concluding that Cornerstone lacked sufficient minimum contacts with Florida to satisfy due process.
*905Background
The complaint alleged as follows. Arnold S. Goldin, Inc., loaned Cornerstone $300,000. The loan was evidenced by a promissory note signed by the parties separately in Virginia and Florida. Goldin subsequently assigned its interest in the promissory note to appellee, Painted Post Group, Inc. (“Post Group”), with which Goldin was affiliated. Both Goldin and Post Group were located in Palm Beach County.
When Cornerstone failed to make payments on the note, Post Group filed suit in Palm Beach County against Cornerstone and others for, amongst other things, repayment of the loan. The defendants in the action below moved for summary-judgment, alleging the tidal court lacked personal jurisdiction over the non-resident defendants. A predecessor judge granted the motion but also granted leave for Post Group to amend its complaint.
Post Group filed an amended complaint only against Cornerstone, alleging a single count for breach of contract. Cornerstone moved to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction and, after conflicting jurisdictional affidavits were filed by the parties, the trial court held an evidentiary hearing. The only witness to testify at the hearing was Arnold Goldin, a principal of Arnold S. Goldin, Inc. Arnold Goldin claimed the parties had entered into a “verbal agreement” that payments on the promissory note would be made to his business address in Palm Beach County. Based on Arnold Goldin’s testimony, a successor judge2 concluded that Post Group had established both jurisdictional facts and minimum contacts between Cornerstone and Florida sufficient to assert personal jurisdiction over Cornerstone. From that order, Cornerstone brings this appeal.
Analysis
Personal jurisdiction over a nonresident defendant may be exercised only when the following two-pronged test has been satisfied: (1) the complaint alleges facts that would subject the defendant to Florida’s “long-arm” statute,3 and (2) the . defendant has sufficient “minimum contacts” to meet traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice such that the defendant could “‘reasonably anticipate being haled into court’ ” due to its actions. Venetian Salami Co. v. Parthenais, 554 So.2d 499, 501 (Fla.1989) (quoting WorldWide Volkswagen Corp. v. Woodson, 444 U.S. 286, 297, 100 S.Ct. 559, 62 L.Ed.2d 490 (1980)); Henderson v. Elias, 56 So.3d 86 (Fla. 4th DCA 2011); Failure to pay on a contract requiring payment in Florida has been found sufficient to satisfy Florida’s long-arm statute conferring jurisdiction over breach of contract actions. Smith Architectural Grp., Inc. v. Dehaan, 867 So.2d 434, 436 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004). Post Group’s amended complaint thus meets the first prong of the Venetian Salami test.
*906The mere fact, however, that Cornerstone allegedly breached a contract by failing to make payments on the contract in Florida would not constitute sufficient minimum contacts with this state to satisfy due process. Taskey v. Burtis, 785 So.2d 557, 559 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001) (“Factors that go into determining whether sufficient minimum contacts exist include the foreseeability that the defendant’s conduct will result in suit in the forum state and the defendant’s purposeful availment of the forum’s privileges and protections.”); Labry v. Whitney Nat’l Bank, 8 So.3d 1239, 1241 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009); Ganiko v. Ganiko, 826 So.2d 391, 394-95 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002). As neither Post Group’s amended complaint nor Goldin’s hearing testimony showed that any related substantial act beyond repayment of the promissory note was required to be and/or actually was performed in Florida, Cornerstone does not have sufficient minimum contacts with this state to support the assertion of personal jurisdiction over it. See deMco Techs., Inc. v.C.S. Eng’d Castings, Inc., 769 So.2d 1128, 1131 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000).
Conclusion
Accordingly, the order appealed from is reversed and remanded with directions to grant Cornerstone’s motion to dismiss without prejudice to Post Group refiling its complaint in an appropriate forum.
Reversed and remanded for further proceedings.
CIKLIN, C.J., DAMOORGIAN and FORST, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Intego Software, LLC v. Concept Dev., Inc., 198 So. 3d 887 (Fla. 1st DCA 2016)…d 802 (11th Cir.2010). But my belief that we should 'affirm' the dismissal'without prejudice for Intego to refile in an appropriate foruiñ'is consistent with what other courts have done. See Cornerstone Inv. Funding, LLC. v. Painted Post Grp., Inc., 188 So. 3d 904 (Fla. 4th DCA 2016) (reversing denial of motion to dismiss without prejudice to refiling in an appropriate forum); Camp Illahee Investors, Inc. v. Blackman, 870 So. 2d 80 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003) (directing trial court to dismiss claim without prejudice t…
-
Astro Aluminum Treating Co., Inc. v. Inter Contal, Inc. (Fla. 4th DCA 2020)…Regardless, the plaintiff must also satisfy the second prong of the analysis; showing the defendant has sufficient minimum contacts with Florida to satisfy due process. Id. at 502; see also Cornerstone Inv. Funding, LLC v. Painted Post Grp., Inc., 188 So. 3d 904, 906 (Fla. 4th DCA 2016) (“The mere fact, however, that Cornerstone allegedly breached a contract by failing to make payments on the contract in Florida would not constitute sufficient minimum contacts with this state to satisfy due process.”). Thi…
-
Herman v. Herman (Fla. 3d DCA 2020)…t payor, while in Texas, entered into an oral loan agreement with mother-in-law (a Florida resident) over the phone; payment was to be made in Florida and some payments were made in Florida); Cornerstone Inv. Funding, LLC v. Painted Post Grp., Inc., 188 So. 3d 904 (Fla. 4th DCA 2016). See also Taylor v. Gutierrez, 129 So. 3d 415, 419 (Fla. 3d DCA 2013) (citing to Two Worlds United v. Zylstra, 46 So. 3d 1175, 1178 (Fla. 2d DCA 2010) for the proposition that “coming ‘to Florida only a few times a year to visit…
Previewing 3 of 6 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- World-Wide Volkswagen Corp. v. Woodson, 444 U.S. 286 (U.S. 1980)
- Venetian Salami Co. v. J.S. Parthenais, 554 So. 2d 499 (Fla. 1989)
- deMCO Techs., Inc. v. C.S. Engineered Castings, Inc., 769 So. 2d 1128 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000)
- Taskey v. Burtis, 785 So. 2d 557 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001)
- Smith Architectural Grp., Inc. v. Christel Dehaan, 867 So. 2d 434 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004)
- Doren M. Ganiko v. Willa C. Ganiko, 826 So. 2d 391 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002)
- Henderson v. Elias, 56 So. 3d 86 (Fla. 4th DCA 2011)
- Whitehead v. State, 685 So. 2d 894 (Fla. 5th DCA 1996)
- The Hanover Ins. Co. v. Marriott Int'l, Inc., 685 So. 2d 894 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996)
- Labry v. Whitney Nat'l Bank, 8 So. 3d 1239 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009)