IRVING RODIN AND REGINA RODIN, HIS WIFE, APPELLANTS,
v.
AUTO-TRAIN CORPORATION, ETC., 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 Rodins filed a personal injury lawsuit against Auto-Train Corporation in Dade County, but the trial court granted Auto-Train's motion to change venue. The appellate court affirmed the change of venue, holding that Auto-Train, as a domestic Florida corporation, did not maintain an office in Dade County where the Rodins could properly sue it.
Venue was not properly laid in Dade County. For a domestic corporation, venue is proper only in the county where the corporation has or usually keeps an office for transaction of its customary business, where the cause of action accrued, or where property in litigation is located. Since Auto-Train had no office in Dade County and the cause of action did not occur there, the change of venue was proper.
[1] Venue for actions against a domestic corporation is proper in the county where the corporation has an office for the transaction of its customary business, where the caus…
[2] The sale of tickets by a third party does not create an agency relationship for venue purposes when that relationship has terminated prior to the filing of the lawsuit.
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“Actions against domestic corporations shall be brought only in the county where such corporation has, or usually keeps, an office for transaction of its customary business, where the cause of action accrued, or where the property in litigation is located.”
Establishes the venue requirement for suits against domestic corporations under Florida Statutes Section 47.051
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceIrving Rodin was injured on August 18, 1975, while a passenger on Auto-Train's train traveling from Virginia to Florida. The Rodins filed their compla…
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 Agency Relationship cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
The trial court granted a motion for change of venue filed by the defendant, Auto-Train Corporation (Auto-Train). This interlocutory appeal follows, and we have jurisdiction pursuant to Fla.R.App.P. 9.130(a)(3)(A).
Irving Rodin and Regina Rodin, his wife, (Rodin), filed a complaint in Dade County on June 18, 1979, seeking damages for injuries sustained on August 18, 1975, while he was a passenger on defendant’s train traveling from Virginia to Florida. Auto-Train’s motion asserted that venue was improperly laid under the provisions of Section 47.051, Florida Statutes (1977)1 in that [*DCCCXCI] Auto-Train is a Florida corporation and has its principal place of business and its office for the transaction of its customary business in Seminole County, Florida. An affidavit in support of said motion states that Auto-Train did not maintain an office nor did it have any agents in Dade County.
Both parties agree that the cause of action did not occur in Dade County and that Auto-Train is a domestic corporation. Since there is no property in litigation, the sole issue is whether Auto-Train had, or kept, an office in Dade County for the transaction of its customary business. We think not.
The Rodins argue that venue was properly laid in Dade County because American Automobile Association (AAA) officers in Dade County had sold tickets for Auto-Train from April of 1978 until August of 1978. If it were found that the sale of tickets created an agency relationship, the present ruling would remain unaffected because the statutory provisions concerning an agent apply to foreign corporations only. Majestic II Enterprises, Inc. v. Butler, 372 So. 2d 548 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979). It is not necessary for us to further consider this remaining issue since the facts presented to us show that this action was filed on June 20, 1979. On this filing date the sale of tickets by AAA had long been terminated and no relationship existed with Auto-Train. Gates v. Stucco Corp., 112 So. 2d 36 (Fla. 3d DCA 1959).
The order of the trial court is affirmed.
. Section 47.051, Florida Statutes (1977) provides:
“Actions against domestic corporations shall be brought only in the county where such cor [*DCCCXCI] poration has, or usually keeps, an office for transaction of its customary business, where the cause of action accrued, or where the property in litigation is located. Actions against foreign corporations doing business in this state shall be brought in a county where such corporation has an agent or other representative, where the cause of action accrued, or where the property in litigation is located.”
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Valle v. Mador, 478 So. 2d 416 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985)…law. In Gates v. Stucco, 112 So. 2d 36, 38 (Fla. 3d DCA 1959), we stated that: “[t]he statute as to venue applies as of the time of the filing of the suit, and not as of the time of the accrual of the cause of action.” See also Rodin v. Auto Train, 377 So. 2d 810 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979). Appellants seek to avoid the import of Gates and Rodin by asserting that appel-lee’s acceptance of substituted service constituted a waiver of his venue privilege. The cases upon which they rely, however, do not support their po…
-
U-Haul Co. OF N. Fla., Inc. v. Fuller, 417 So. 2d 1102 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982)…“for transaction of its customary business.” Doing business in a county or having an agent in a county, without more, is not a sufficient basis for venue in a suit against a domestic, as opposed to a foreign, corporation. Rodin v. Auto-Train Corp., 377 So. 2d 810 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979). On remand appellee should be permitted to transfer this cause to Duval County, failing which, the complaint will be dismissed. REVERSED AND REMANDED. BERANEK and WALDEN, JJ., concur.…
-
Sunshine State Ins. Co. v. Munoz-Upton, 127 So. 3d 822 (Fla. 3d DCA 2013)…although insurance agents statewide write Sunshine State policies, Sun'shine State itself keeps an office for the transaction of its customary business only in Duval, and not in Miami-Dade County. As this court confirmed in Rodin v. AutoTrain Corp., 377 So. 2d 810, 811 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979), this method of conducting [*824] business through an agent does not make venue proper in an action against a domestic corporation wherever such agents are located because “the statutory provisions concerning an agent apply t…
Authorities Cited
- Majestic II v. Butler, 372 So. 2d 548 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979)
- Gates v. Stucco Corp., 112 So. 2d 36 (Fla. 3d DCA 1959)