LORI S. NORRIS ET AL., PETITIONERS,
v.
SOUTHERN BELL TELEPHONE AND TELEGRAPH COMPANY, RESPONDENT
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.
Florida appellate court quashed a circuit court's transfer of a personal injury action to county court, holding that jurisdiction must be determined by the amount claimed in good faith, not by the court's skepticism about the claim's validity.
Jurisdiction of a court as to the amount involved is determined by the amount claimed in good faith, and a circuit court cannot transfer a case based on doubt about whether the plaintiff's claim is exaggerated.
[1] Jurisdiction of a court over a civil action is determined by the amount claimed in good faith by the plaintiff, not by the trial court's assessment of whether the claim i…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceLori S. Norris filed a personal injury action against Southern Bell Telephone and Telegraph Company in circuit court. The circuit court transferred th…
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 Good Faith Pleading cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
We are presented with a petition for writ of certiorari seeking review of an order of the circuit court transferring a personal injury action from the circuit court to the county court upon the ground that the amount claimed in good faith does not reach the jurisdictional limit of the circuit court. See Fla.Stat. § 26.012 and § 34.01. Review of an order transferring is proper under a petition for certiorari. Easley v. Garden Sanctuary, Fla.App.1960, 120 So. 2d 59, 78 A.L.R.2d 1199.
There is no doubt that the rule to be applied in determining the jurisdiction of a court as to the amount involved is the amount claimed in good faith. Rocco v. Coffey, Fla.App.1964, 163 So. 2d 21. There may be a basis in this record for a belief that the plaintiff exaggerated her claim but it cannot be said that.such a conclusion appears without issue. It is not our purpose to preclude by this opinion a transfer if later developments in this case substantiate the trial judge’s conclusion in the order appealed. Nevertheless, under the rule as stated in Castellano v. Bader Bros. Van Lines, Inc., Fla.App.1968, 208 So. 2d 842, we are compelled to quash the order transferring the cause with directions to the circuit court to proceed with the cause.
It is so ordered.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (11 total)
-
Grunewald v. Warren, 655 So. 2d 1227 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995)…which they may actually recover. The rule for “determining the jurisdiction of a court as to the amount involved is the amount claimed in good faith. Rocco v. Coffey, Fla.App.1964, 163 So. 2d 21 [2nd DCA].” Norris v. Southern Bell Tel. and Tel. Co., 324 So. 2d 108 (Fla. 3d DCA 1975); Seaboard Air Line Ry. v. Ray, 52 Fla. 634, 42 So. 714 (1906). See White v. Marine Transp. Lines, Inc., 372 So. 2d 81 (Fla.1979); Richter Jewelry Co. v. Harrison, 147 Fla. 732, 3 So. 2d 387 (1941). To decide whether appellants hav…
-
Sol M. Ross v. Barnett, 436 So. 2d 1040 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983)…fore us that the amount in controversy is indisputably less than $5,000 or that the allegations of Count II claiming entitlement to an amount in excess of $5,000 were not made in good faith. See Norris v. Southern Bell Telephone & Telegraph Company, 324 So. 2d 108 (Fla. 3d DCA 1975); Thibadeau v. Santini Bros., Inc., 315 So. 2d 550 (Fla. 4th DCA 1975). If later developments in the case show without dispute that the amount in controversy is less than $5,000, the trial court is free to transfer Count II. Norris…
-
Metro. Drywall Sys., Inc. v. Dudley, 472 So. 2d 1345 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985)…In determining whether the trial court’s jurisdiction was properly invoked, the controlling standard is the amount claimed and in good faith, placed in controversy, not the recoverable amount. Norris v. Southern Bell Telephone And Telegraph Company, 324 So. 2d 108 (Fla. 3d DCA 1975). Applying that test to the facts contained within the amended complaint, it cannot be said that the appellee pleaded a good faith claim for a sum in excess of $5,000.00. In an effort to overcome the deficiency in the particularly…
Previewing 3 of 11 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Easley v. THE Garden Sanctuary, Inc., 120 So. 2d 59 (Fla. 2d DCA 1960)
- Castellano v. Bader Bros. VAN Lines, Inc., 208 So. 2d 842 (Fla. 3d DCA 1968)
- Rocco v. Coffey, 163 So. 2d 21 (Fla. 2d DCA 1964)