PLUESS-STAUFER INDUSTRIES, INC., APPELLANT,
v.
ROLLASON ENGINEERING & MANUFACTURING, 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.
PSI appealed a default judgment entered against it by a Florida court, challenging the trial court's personal jurisdiction. The appellate court held that because Rollason's complaint failed to allege sufficient jurisdictional facts under Florida's long-arm statute, the default judgment was void and must be set aside.
The court held that the default judgment must be set aside because the complaint contained no allegations supporting Florida jurisdiction. Under Florida law, even a default judgment cannot be upheld when the complaint fails to allege sufficient jurisdictional facts, and service of long-arm process is void without such allegations.
[1] A default judgment entered against a nonresident defendant is void if the complaint lacks sufficient jurisdictional allegations to bring the claim within the ambit of the…
[2] Service of long-arm process is void, and any judgment obtained is also void, when the complaint fails to establish a basis for jurisdiction.
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“Under Florida law, even the entry of a default judgment against a nonresident defendant cannot prevent assertion of lack of personal jurisdiction over a defendant when the complaint lacks sufficient jurisdictional allegations to bring the claim within the ambit of the long-arm statute.”
Establishes the foundational principle that default judgments cannot cure defective jurisdictional allegations
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceRollason filed suit against PSI, a Vermont corporation, in Florida state court seeking indemnity for a lawsuit filed in New Jersey. The complaint alle…
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 Jurisdictional Allegations cases and more on FLexlaw
GRIFFIN, Judge.
This is the appeal of an order denying a Motion for Relief from a default judgment entered against appellant Pluess-Staufer Industries (“PSI”). The principal issue on appeal is whether appellee Rollason Engineering & Manufacturing, Inc. (“Rollason”) alleged sufficient jurisdictional facts in the complaint to permit the lower court to exert personal jurisdiction over PSI.1
Under Florida law, even the entry of a default judgment against a nonresident defendant cannot prevent assertion of lack of personal jurisdiction over a defendant when the complaint lacks sufficient jurisdictional allegations to bring the claim within the ambit of the long-arm statute. Mouzon v. Mouzon, 458 So. 2d 381 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984), accord, Arthur v. Arthur, 543 So. 2d 349 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989). Without a basis for jurisdiction appearing in the complaint and any attachments, service of long-arm process is void and any judgment obtained is also void. Plummer v. Hoover, 519 So. 2d 1158 (Fla. 5th DCA 1988); International Harvester Co. v. Mann, 460 So. 2d 580 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984), Dimino v. Farina, 572 So. 2d 552 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990); Kennedy v. Reed, 533 So. 2d 1200 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988).
The complaint in this case affirmatively alleged that PSI was a Vermont corporation (with a Vermont statutory agent for service of process) against whom Rolla-son was seeking indemnity for a lawsuit filed in New Jersey. It is totally devoid of any allegation from which any basis whatsoever for jurisdiction could be gleaned or even inferred. This complaint could not support exercise of jurisdiction and entry of a judgment by a Florida court. The trial court should have set aside the default judgment and allowed Rollason to amend its complaint to plead its basis for jurisdiction.
REVERSED and REMANDED.
W. SHARP and DIAMANTIS, JJ., concur. . In fairness to the trial court we note that the principal issue argued on appeal and on which we reverse was only barely raised below by motion. The controlling authorities on the issue were not brought to the trial court’s attention. Had the issue been appropriately presented to the trial court, a great deal of the parties’ expense and the courts' time would likely have been saved.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Brown v. Bnb Inv. Holdings, 252 So. 3d 344 (Fla. 3d DCA 2018)
-
White v. Bombardier Corp., 313 F. Supp. 2d 1295 (N.D. Fla. 2004)
Authorities Cited
- Int'l Harvester Co. v. Mann, 460 So. 2d 580 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984)
- Mouzon v. Mouzon, 458 So. 2d 381 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984)
- Barr v. State, 572 So. 2d 552 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990)
- Kennedy v. Reed, 533 So. 2d 1200 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988)
- Evans v. State, 519 So. 2d 1158 (Fla. 5th DCA 1988)
- Arthur v. Arthur, 543 So. 2d 349 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989)