GEMEINSCHAFT EUROPAISCHER KUNSTLER ANASTALT, A LIECHTENSTEIN CORPORATION, PETITIONER,
v.
MIAMI FREEDOM TOWER, INC., F/K/A ZAMINCO FREEDOM TOWER, INC., A FLORIDA CORPORATION, ALFRED ARONOVITZ, AS TRUSTEE, ET AL., RESPONDENTS
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.
A Liechtenstein corporation seeking to foreclose mortgages need not disclose its beneficial owners' identities through interrogatories when the requesting party has not demonstrated relevance to pending claims or defenses at the discovery stage.
A party seeking discovery of a foreign corporation's beneficial owners must demonstrate that such information is relevant to pending claims or defenses or reasonably calculated to lead to admissible evidence before compulsory disclosure is required.
[1] Discovery of a foreign corporation's beneficial owners need not be compelled absent a showing that such information relates to pending claims or defenses or is reasonably…
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 intelligence“protective order should be granted where information sought by discovery is not shown to be related to any pending claim or defense, or shown to be reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence”
Court cited Jerry's South, Inc. v. Morran for the standard governing protective orders in discovery disputes
Gemeinschaft Europaischer Kunstler Anastalt, a Liechtenstein corporation, filed a foreclosure action on first and second mortgages held on the Freedom…
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 Beneficial Ownership cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Gemeinschaft Europaischer Kunstler Anastalt, a Liechtenstein corporation, seeks review of an order compelling answers to certain interrogatories. For the following reasons, we grant the petition and quash the order under review.
Petitioner is suing to foreclose on first and second mortgages that it holds on the Freedom Tower. Alfred Aronovitz, as trustee and holder of a third mortgage, served interrogatories on Petitioner by which he sought to discover the identities of the beneficial owners of the Liechtenstein corporation. Although Aronovitz may be able to demonstrate that he is entitled to the information he seeks at some later point in the litigation, we are not able to discern any basis to compel the disclosure of the corporation’s owners at this stage of the proceeding. See Jerry’s South, Inc. v. Morran, 582 So. 2d 803 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991) (protective order should be granted where information sought by discovery is not shown to be related to any pending claim or defense, or shown to be reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence).
Accordingly, we grant the Petition for Writ of Certiorari and quash the order under review without prejudice to respondent to seek disclosure of such information if and when the posture of the litigation so warrants.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. DAY, 742 So. 2d 408 (Fla. 5th DCA 1999)…exemptions); Department of Revenue v. Stafford, 646 So. 2d 803 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994) (taxpayer cannot avoid 60-day time period in which to challenge ad valorem tax assessment by arguing that it is seeking a refund of taxes paid); Robbins v. Friedman, 625 So. 2d 83 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993) (section 194.171 does not allow court to retain jurisdiction once taxes become delinquent); Hinkley (same); Walker v. Garrison, 610 So. 2d 716 (Fla. 4th DCA 1992) (60-day time period commences upon tax roll certification or when V…
-
Primeco Pers. Commc'ns, L.P. v. Ernie Mastroianni, 837 So. 2d 1157 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003)…e have consolidated them for this opinion. We have jurisdiction. See Department of Revenue v. Eastern American Technologies, Corp., 762 So. 2d 1044 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000); Nikolits v. Ballinger, 736 So. 2d 1253 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999); Robbins v. Friedman, 625 So. 2d 83 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993); § 194.171(6), Fla. Stat. (2002). We agree with Mastroianni that his circuit court proceedings were timely filed, and deny the petitions. Primeco challenged Mastroianni’s assessment of its Duval County property and obtained relie…
-
Ervin Higgs v. Armada KEY W. Ltd. P'ship, 903 So. 2d 303 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005)…of subsection (5). § 194.171(5), (6), Fla. Stat. (2004); Bystrom v. Diaz, 514 So. 2d 1072, 1074 (Fla.1987) (confirming that failure to pay successive years’ taxes deprives a court of jurisdiction to entertain a tax challenge); Robbins v. Friedman, 625 So. 2d 83, 84 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993) (“[i]t is now settled beyond any doubt that [section 194.171(5), (6) ] does not allow a court to retain jurisdiction once taxes become delinquent”). As petitioners correctly contend, the taxpayer in this case did not remain c…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Jerry's S., Inc. v. Morran, 582 So. 2d 803 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991)