WILLIAM R. PONSOLDT AND MARIANE PONSOLDT, APPELLANTS,
v.
THE CADLE COMPANY, AS ASSIGNEE OF FIRST UNION NATIONAL BANK OF FLORIDA, FROM THE FDIC, AS RECEIVER FOR SOUTHEAST BANK, N.A. AND PEGASUS RANCH, INC., APPELLEES
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Waiver Of Personal Jurisdiction cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
William and Mariane Ponsoldt seek review of an order that denied their motion to vacate a final judgment. In 1991, a bank sued Pegasus Ranch, Inc. and the Ponsoldts to foreclose a mortgage. The Ranch filed a motion to dismiss without raising an objection to personal jurisdiction. Later the Ranch and the Ponsoldts moved for a protective order. In that motion, the Ponsoldts appeared “without waiving rights exercised in their Motion to Dismiss.” The trial court concluded that the Ponsoldts “adopted a motion to dismiss filed by the Corporate Defendant without reserving the right to raise an issue of in personam jurisdiction.” We find no error in the trial court’s conclusion that the Ponsoldts adopted the motion to dismiss, which constituted a waiver of the lack of personal jurisdiction. See Fiocchi v. Trainello, 566 So. 2d 904, 904 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990); Zimmerman v. Weinberg, 557 So. 2d 193, 194 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990).
AFFIRMED.
GROSS, TAYLOR and MAY, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Corbblin Bush v. State, 945 So. 2d 1207 (Fla. 2006)…enue lies in Leon County. See, e.g., Salazar v. State, 892 So. 2d 545, 547 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005); Barber v. State, 661 So. 2d 355, 356 n. 2 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995). The decisions of the Fourth District Court of Appeal are mixed. See, e.g., Mattern v. State, 829 So. 2d 937, 937 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002) (stating that venue lies in the county where the prisoner is housed); Burks v. State, 789 So. 2d 430, 430 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001) (same); Smith v. State, 785 So. 2d 1237, 1237 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001) (same); but see Harris v. State,…
-
Griffith v. Crosby, 898 So. 2d 212 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005)…tion in the Tenth Judicial Circuit in Highlands County. On April 16, 2004, that court dismissed Griffith’s petition without prejudice, stating that such a petition must be filed in the county where Griffith was incarcerated. Citing Mattern v. State, 829 So. 2d 937 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002), the court stated that Griffith could still “file [his petition] in the correct jurisdiction.” Pursuant to Mattem, “[a]ny petition for writ of mandamus directed to the Department of Corrections must be filed in the county where a…
Authorities Cited
- Fiocchi v. Trainello, 566 So. 2d 904 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990)
- Zimmerman v. Weinberg, 557 So. 2d 193 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990)