PAN AMERICANA TELEVISION LOS ANGELES, INC., APPELLANT,
v.
LATIN MEDIA CONSULTANTS, CORP., ETC., ET AL., 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.
Pan Americana Television appealed the trial court's denial of its motion to quash service of process, arguing that the plaintiff failed to establish jurisdiction over the out-of-state defendant. The appellate court reversed, holding that the plaintiff bore the burden of proving the defendant conducted business in Florida and failed to meet that burden.
The court reversed the trial court's order denying the motion to quash, holding that the burden of proof to establish valid service of process rests upon the party seeking to invoke the court's jurisdiction, and where that party fails to meet this burden, service is invalid and the motion to quash must be granted.
[1] A plaintiff seeking to establish jurisdiction over a foreign corporation under a statute allowing service on an agent for a business operating within the state bears the…
[2] Statutes authorizing substituted service of process must be strictly construed.
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 intelligence“The burden of proof to sustain the validity of service of process is upon the person who seeks to invoke the jurisdiction of the court; failure to meet this burden will render service on an agent invalid and ineffectual.”
Establishes the fundamental principle that plaintiff bears the burden of proving valid service of process
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceLatin Media Consultants filed suit against Pan Americana Television, a California corporation with its principal office in California. Service of proc…
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
NATHAN, Judge.
This is an interlocutory appeal by defendant-appellant, Pan Americana Television Los Angeles, Inc., from an order of the circuit court denying the defendant’s motion to quash service of process and to dismiss the cause for lack of jurisdiction.
Appellee, Latin Media Consultants, filed its complaint against the appellant, alleging that the appellant’s principal office and place of business was in the State of California and that it conducted business in Dade County, Florida. Service of process was executed upon “Olga Piloto, corp. sec., in the absence of pres., v. pres., cashier, treas., sec., and all other heads.”
Appellant filed its affidavit stating that Olga Piloto was not the corporate secretary of appellant, not a corporate officer and had never been authorized in any manner to act for appellant. The last assertion states that “Pan American does not now nor has it ever conducted any business in Dade County, Florida.” The appellee neither filed any affidavit nor presented any testimony in support of jurisdiction to contravene appellant’s affidavit. Thereupon, the appellant filed its motion to quash service of process and to dismiss. The trial court entered its order denying the motion, and this appeal ensued.
It is the appellant’s contention that service should have been quashed and the case dismissed because the appellee failed to meet its burden of proof to show that the appellant was carrying on a business or business venture within the State of Florida in order to effectuate service under Fla.Stat. § 48.181, F.S.A. We agree. This statute must be strictly construed. The burden of proof to sustain the validity of service of process is upon the person who seeks to invoke the jurisdiction of the court; failure to meet this burden will render service on an agent invalid and ineffectual. Zirin v. Charles Pfizer and Company, Fla.1961, 128 So. 2d 594; Youngblood v. Citrus Associates of the New York Cotton Exchange, Inc., Fla.App. 1973, 276 So. 2d 505. Compare Citizens & Southern Bank of Atlanta v. Popkin, Fla.App.1973, 281 So. 2d 522.
Therefore, for the reasons stated and upon the authorities cited, the order ap pealed is reversed and the cause is remanded to the trial court for further proceedings consistent herewith.
Reversed and remanded.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Hyco Mfg. Co. v. Rotex Int'l Corp., 355 So. 2d 471 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978)
Authorities Cited
- Zirin v. Charles Pfizer & Co., Inc., 128 So. 2d 594 (Fla. 1961)
- Youngblood v. Citrus Assocs. OF the NEW York Cotton Exch., Inc., 276 So. 2d 505 (Fla. 4th DCA 1973)
- The Keyes Co. v. Marmaros, 281 So. 2d 522 (Fla. 3d DCA 1973)
- Citizens & S. Bank OF Atlanta v. Popkin, 281 So. 2d 522 (Fla. 3d DCA 1973)