J.S. PARTHNAIS, APPELLANT,
v.
VENETIAN SALAMI COMPANY, A FOREIGN CORPORATION, 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.
Plaintiff Parthnais appeals the dismissal of his complaint against Venetian Salami Company for lack of personal jurisdiction. The court reverses, holding that once a plaintiff adequately alleges facts satisfying Florida's statutory jurisdiction requirements under § 48.193, the plaintiff need not separately demonstrate constitutional minimum contacts, though the defendant may challenge the allegations by requiring affidavit proof.
Once a plaintiff has alleged sufficient facts to comply with § 48.193, the plaintiff does not need to separately allege minimum contacts to satisfy constitutional due process. If a defendant challenges the complaint's allegations, the burden shifts to the plaintiff to prove those allegations by affidavit.
[1] A plaintiff must allege sufficient facts to comply with Florida's long-arm statute to establish personal jurisdiction over a defendant.
[2] Once a defendant challenges personal jurisdiction by asserting a lack of minimum contacts, the burden shifts to the plaintiff to offer proof of the jurisdictional allegat…
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“once the plaintiff has met the requirements of § 48.193, the plaintiff does not have to further allege sufficient minimum contacts in the state to meet constitutional due process”
Establishes the controlling legal standard that statutory compliance is sufficient without additional due process analysis
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceParthnais filed a complaint against Venetian Salami Company, a foreign corporation. The complaint allegedly contained sufficient factual allegations t…
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 Minimum Contacts cases and more on FLexlaw
THOMPSON, Judge.
Parthnais (plaintiff) appeals an order dismissing his complaint for lack of jurisdic tion over Venetian Salami Company (defendant). He contends the trial court erred in dismissing his complaint because it sufficiently alleged the facts necessary to comply with § 48.193, Fla.Stat. so as to obtain personal jurisdiction. We agree and reverse.
The defendant contends that although the statutory requirements for jurisdiction may have been met, constitutional due process requires that a defendant must have sufficient minimum contacts in the state. Defendant argues that once he controverts personal jurisdiction by asserting the lack of minimum contacts, the burden shifts to the plaintiff to show by affidavit that the defendant did have sufficient minimum contacts.
There is conflict in the Florida appellate decisions as to whether it is necessary to show the defendant has sufficient minimum contacts to satisfy the due process rights of the defendant in addition to alleging the statutory requirements to obtain personal jurisdiction. The decisions of two District Courts of Appeal support the view urged by the defendant and hold that meeting the statutory requirements is only the first step. The second step is to show that the defendant has minimum contacts in the state in order to satisfy the due process requirement. Unger v. Publisher Entry Service, Inc., 513 So. 2d 674 (Fla. 5th DCA 1987); Osborn v. The University Society, 378 So. 2d 873 (Fla. 2d DCA 1979).
Two other District Courts of Appeal have held that once the plaintiff has met the requirements of § 48.193, the plaintiff does not have to further allege sufficient minimum contacts in the state to meet constitutional due process. Jones v. Jack Maxton Chevrolet, Inc., 484 So. 2d 43 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986); Engineered Storage Systems v. National Partitions & Interiors, Inc., 415 So. 2d 114 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982).
Our decision in this case is controlled by the prior decision of this court in Jones. The plaintiff alleged sufficient facts to comply with § 48.193. If the defendant challenges the allegations in the complaint the burden shifts to the plaintiff to offer proof of the allegations by affidavit. Jones, 484 So. 2d at 46. The defendant challenged the allegations of the complaint and the plaintiff filed affidavits in support of his allegations in compliance with Jones.
The order dismissing the complaint is reversed and this cause is remanded for further proceedings.
WENTWORTH and WIGGINTON, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Venetian Salami Co. v. J.S. Parthenais, 554 So. 2d 499 (Fla. 1989)…GRIMES, Justice. We review Parthnais v. Venetian Salami Co., 538 So. 2d 532 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989), because of conflict with Unger v. Publisher Entry Service, Inc., 513 So. 2d 674 (Fla. 5th DCA 1987), review denied, 520 So. 2d 586 (Fla.1988); Scordilis v. Drobnicki, 443 So. 2d 411 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984); and Osborn v. University…
Authorities Cited
- Unger v. Publisher Entry Serv., Inc., 513 So. 2d 674 (Fla. 5th DCA 1987)
- Osborn v. The Univ. Soc'y, Inc., 378 So. 2d 873 (Fla. 2d DCA 1979)
- Engineered Storage Sys., Inc. v. Nat'l Partitions & Interiors, Inc., 415 So. 2d 114 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982)
- Daignault v. Allstate Ins. Co., 484 So. 2d 43 (Fla. 5th DCA 1986)