Extraterritorial Jurisdiction

127 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• United States v. Walczak
  783 F.2d 852· 9th Cir.· 1986-02-21 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the district court had jurisdiction, the search was lawful under an executive agreement, and the denial of an evidentiary hearing and grand jury transcripts was proper.
• In re Israel-British Bank (London) Ltd. v. Fed. Deposit Ins. Corp.
  536 F.2d 509· 2d Cir.· 1976-05-25 ·cited 12×
  A foreign banking corporation not licensed or regulated in the United States is not excluded from filing for voluntary bankruptcy under Section 4a of the Bankruptcy Act.
• In re Ins. Antitrust Litig. ACE Check Cashing, Inc. v. AETNA Cas. & Sur. Co.
  938 F.2d 919· 9th Cir.· 1991-06-18 ·cited 10×
  The court denied a motion for rehearing, holding that the purpose of Florida's Unauthorized Insurers Process Law is not limited to protecting Florida residents, but also applies to non-residents.
• United States v. Goldberg
  830 F.2d 459· 3d Cir.· 1987-09-29 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the indictment did not charge, and the evidence did not support, a violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2314 or § 1343 for wire transmissions solely between foreign countries, as this does not constitute 'foreign commerce' under the relevant statutes.
• Zahourek v. Arthur Young & Co.
  750 F.2d 827· 10th Cir.· 1984-12-19 ·cited 10×
  The Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) does not apply to the termination of an American citizen by an American employer when the place of employment is in a foreign country.
• Natural Res. Def. Council, Inc. v. Nuclear Regulatory Comm'n & United States
  647 F.2d 1345· D.C. Cir.· 1981-03-30 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) lawfully declined to consider projected health and safety impacts of a nuclear export in the recipient foreign country, and that the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) does not require an environmental impact state
• Hemphill v. Moseley
  443 F.2d 322· 10th Cir.· 1971-04-13 ·cited 10×
  Military jurisdiction over crimes committed by servicemen in foreign countries is not affected by O'Callahan v. Parker.
• Application of the People OF the State OF NEW York for an Order Requiring Joseph C. O'Neill to Attend & Testify Before the Grand Jury of the Cnty. of N.Y.
  100 So. 2d 149· Fla.· 1958-01-22 ·cited 10×
  Florida Supreme Court upheld a circuit court's decision invalidating a uniform reciprocal witness statute as unconstitutional, holding that the statute violates the Fourteenth Amendment privilege of free interstate travel by allowing one state to compel a non-criminal witness fro
• Nat'l Bank OF Canada v. Interbank Card Ass'n & Bank of Montreal
  666 F.2d 6· 2d Cir.· 1981-02-20 ·cited 9×
  The court affirmed the dismissal of the Sherman Act claim, finding no sufficient anticompetitive effect on United States commerce. The contract claims were affirmed on the district court's reasoning.
• United States v. Otmar Sing Gonzalez
  972 F.3d 1264· 11th Cir.· 2020-08-26 ·cited 8×
  The Maritime Drug Law Enforcement Act (MDLEA), as applied to foreign nationals on a foreign vessel in the territorial waters of a consenting foreign nation, exceeds Congress's constitutional authority under the Foreign Commerce Clause.
• United States v. Wilchcombe
  838 F.3d 1179· 11th Cir.· 2016-10-04 ·cited 8×
  Three defendants were convicted of maritime drug trafficking and conspiracy under the Maritime Drug Law Enforcement Act (MDLEA) after their fishing vessel was intercepted by the Coast Guard carrying approximately 895 kilograms of cocaine and marijuana. The Eleventh Circuit affirm
• United States v. Nunez
  668 F.2d 10· 1st Cir.· 1981-12-10 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the indictment's date specificity was sufficient and that the appellants' other claims lacked merit.
• Kilday v. United States
  481 F.2d 655· 5th Cir.· 1973-06-20 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the Miranda warnings do not apply to interrogations conducted by foreign police officers.
• State v. JOS. S. White
  155 Fla. 591· Fla.· 1944-12-05 ·cited 8×
  The Florida Supreme Court held that a probate court has jurisdiction to construe a will and determine which of two legatees is entitled to a specific piece of jewelry (Item 26) that is within the court's territorial jurisdiction, even though another disputed item (Item 22) has be
• United States v. Nicomedes Martinez-Hidalgo
  993 F.2d 1052· 3d Cir.· 1993-05-21 ·cited 7×
  The court held that the Maritime Drug Law Enforcement Act applies to stateless vessels regardless of the destination of the drugs, and a Fourth Amendment claim is waived if not raised in the district court.
• Ocean Garden, Inc. v. Marktrade Co., Inc.
  953 F.2d 500· 9th Cir.· 1991-12-31 ·cited 7×
  The court held that it had jurisdiction over the case, both through extraterritorial application of the Lanham Act and because the infringing goods passed through a U.S. foreign trade zone, and affirmed the preliminary injunction.
• United States v. Quemener
  789 F.2d 145· 2d Cir.· 1986-04-28 ·cited 7×
  The court held that the seizure of the MARGIE was within 150 miles of the United States coast, as measured from Nantucket Island, and was supported by reasonable suspicion, thus denying the motion to suppress.
• Rodriguez v. State
  Fla. 4th DCA· 2021-10-13 ·cited 6×
  The court denied a petition for writ of prohibition challenging the trial court's subject matter jurisdiction over a petitioner charged with soliciting a child for unlawful sexual conduct via text messages and phone calls made from outside the United States. The petitioner argued
• Daniel v. State
  20 So. 3d 1008· Fla. 4th DCA· 2009-11-04 ·cited 6×
  Paul Daniel appeals the denial of a motion to suppress his arrest, arguing that detectives from Coconut Creek lacked jurisdiction to stop and arrest him in Margate. The court affirmed, holding that the detectives' conduct was authorized under a mutual aid agreement between the tw
• Smith v. United States
  953 F.2d 1116· 9th Cir.· 1991-12-24 ·cited 6×
  The Federal Tort Claims Act's 'foreign country' exception applies to Antarctica, meaning the United States retains sovereign immunity for tort claims arising there.
• United States v. Noriega
  746 F. Supp. 1506· S.D. Fla.· 1990-06-08 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the United States has jurisdiction over the alleged extraterritorial criminal activities of General Noriega, and that the RICO and Travel Act statutes apply to such conduct.
• Stein v. Stein
  537 So. 2d 613· Fla. 4th DCA· 1988-12-07 ·cited 6×
• United States v. Mohammad Qadir Khalje
  658 F.2d 90· 2d Cir.· 1981-09-03 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the statute prohibiting false statements in visa applications applies to the knowing presentment of such statements, regardless of whether they were made under oath, and that extraterritorial jurisdiction was properly exercised.
• Fidenas AG v. Compagnie Internationale Pour L'Informatique CII Honeywell Bull S.A.
  606 F.2d 5· 2d Cir.· 1979-08-06 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the district court correctly dismissed the complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction because the transactions were predominantly foreign, and Congress would not have intended U.S. courts to adjudicate such disputes.
• Carone v. State
  361 So. 2d 437· Fla. 2d DCA· 1978-07-14 ·cited 6×
  Appellant Carone was charged with conspiracy to possess marijuana in Florida, though the marijuana was never in Florida and there was no intent to bring it there. The court affirmed his conviction, holding that Florida has jurisdiction to prosecute conspiracy to commit an offense
• United States v. Brown
  549 F.2d 954· 4th Cir.· 1977-02-07 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the District Court had jurisdiction over a conspiracy to import heroin, even though the overt acts of conspiracy occurred outside the United States, because the conspiracy was intended to produce detrimental effects within the United States.
• City OF Miami Beach v. Solomon
  228 So. 2d 437· Fla. 3d DCA· 1969-11-04 ·cited 6×
  The City of Miami Beach appeals from an injunction preventing it from collecting occupational taxes from pest control companies headquartered outside the city but performing services within it. The appellate court reversed, holding that municipalities may impose non-discriminator
• Villeda Aldana v. Fresh Del Monte Produce, Inc.
  305 F. Supp. 2d 1285· S.D. Fla.· 2003-12-12 ·cited 5×
  The court held that the plaintiffs' allegations of torture, unlawful detention, and denial of the right to organize did not rise to the level of violations of customary international law actionable under the Alien Tort Claims Act (ATCA) or Torture Victims Protection Act (TVPA).
• State v. Saunders
  508 So. 2d 473· Fla. 4th DCA· 1987-06-03 ·cited 5×
  Florida appeals the dismissal of a cannabis possession charge against Saunders, whose boat was boarded by the Coast Guard in international waters forty miles east of Fort Lauderdale. The court reverses, holding that Florida has jurisdiction because the defendant's conduct constit
• Temistocles Ramirez de Arellano v. Caspar W. Weinberger
  724 F.2d 143· D.C. Cir.· 1983-12-22 ·cited 5×
  The court held that while the case is not a nonjusticiable political question, injunctive and declaratory relief are inappropriate due to foreign affairs concerns and the availability of monetary relief under the Tucker Act.
• Hans W. Puhl v. United States
  376 F.2d 194· 10th Cir.· 1967-04-28 ·cited 5×
  The court held that the appellant's status as an enlisted member of the United States Army conferred military jurisdiction, even for an offense committed in Germany.
• Sanders v. Gracie Murray Laird
  865 So. 2d 649· Fla. 2d DCA· 2004-02-13 ·cited 4×
  The Florida Second District Court of Appeal granted Sanders' petition for a writ of prohibition, holding that a circuit court exceeded its authority by issuing a writ of bodily attachment intended for execution outside Florida. The court concluded that Florida Statute § 61.11(2),
• United States v. Carrion-Caliz
  944 F.2d 220· 5th Cir.· 1991-09-27 ·cited 4×
• Indep. Union OF Flight Attendants v. PAN Am. World Airways, Inc.
  923 F.2d 678· 9th Cir.· 1991-01-10 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the district court had jurisdiction over a dispute concerning an alleged breach of a collective bargaining agreement, even if the agreement covered foreign flights, because the breach itself was the basis for jurisdiction under the Railway Labor Act.
• Slater Williams v. Froehlke
  490 F.2d 998· 2d Cir.· 1974-01-14 ·cited 4×
  A court-martial has jurisdiction to try a serviceman for a non-service-connected offense committed in a foreign country, even if O'Callahan v. Parker would limit such jurisdiction for offenses committed within U.S. territorial limits.
• Williams v. Fla. Real Est. Comm'n & Ronald L. Myers
  232 So. 2d 239· Fla. 4th DCA· 1970-01-21 ·cited 4×
  An administrative agency created by state statute has jurisdiction only over acts committed within the state's territorial boundaries; the Florida Real Estate Commission lacks authority to regulate or discipline a licensed broker for conduct occurring outside Florida.
• Great Atl. & Pac. Tea Co. v. Porter
  156 F.2d 812· Emer. Ct. App.· 1946-08-13 ·cited 4×
  The Price Administrator has statutory authority to forbid the importation of green coffee purchased abroad at prices above a prescribed maximum to prevent inflationary pressures on domestic price ceilings.
• United States v. Inco Bank & Tr. Corp.
  845 F.2d 919· 11th Cir.· 1988-05-20 ·cited 3×
  A member of a criminal conspiracy that takes place both in the United States and in a foreign country can be convicted of engaging in the conspiracy even if they perform no overt act within the United States.
• United States v. Helmich
  521 F. Supp. 1246· M.D. Fla.· 1981-08-26 ·cited 3×
  The court held that the statute of limitations for capital offenses applies to charges under 18 U.S.C. § 794, and that the indictment was timely filed. It also found that Wharton's Rule, territorial jurisdiction, and speedy trial/due process claims did not warrant dismissal.
• United States v. Benitez
  28 F. Supp. 2d 1361· S.D. Fla.· 1998-11-04 ·cited 2×
  The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and international principles of non bis in idem, comity, and abstention do not bar the United States from prosecuting individuals for an offense for which they were already tried and convicted in a foreign country.
• Stepansky v. State
  707 So. 2d 877· Fla. 5th DCA· 1998-03-04 ·cited 2×
  Stepansky challenges Florida's authority to prosecute him for crimes allegedly committed aboard a foreign-flagged cruise ship 100 miles off Florida's coast in international waters. The court holds that Florida's statute purporting to extend criminal jurisdiction to such acts viol
• Stauffacher v. Bennett
  969 F.2d 455· 7th Cir.· 1992-07-28 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the defendants, Canadian residents, lacked sufficient contacts with Wisconsin to establish personal jurisdiction under the state's long-arm statute or federal statutes for claims arising from a failed investment venture.
• Boak v. Consol. Rail Corp.
  850 F.2d 110· 2d Cir.· 1988-06-24 ·cited 2×
  The Federal Employers' Liability Act (FELA) does not provide a right of recovery for railroad employees injured outside the territorial limits of the United States.
• Blue Cross & Blue Shield OF Kan. City v. Fletcher Bell
  798 F.2d 1331· 10th Cir.· 1986-08-15 ·cited 2×
  Kansas's mandated-benefit and mandated-provider statutes, including HB 3064, constitute the 'business of insurance' and are therefore exempt from ERISA preemption under the McCarran-Ferguson Act, and their extraterritorial application does not violate due process.
• United States v. Crews
  605 F. Supp. 730· S.D. Fla.· 1985-02-20 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the defendants' motions to dismiss and suppress were denied, finding that the United States had jurisdiction over the criminal conduct and that the search and seizure were lawful.
• Am. Rice, Inc. v. The Ark. Rice Growers Coop. Ass'n
  701 F.2d 408· 5th Cir.· 1983-03-28 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the Lanham Act applies to trademark infringement by a U.S. corporation occurring in a foreign country if it affects U.S. commerce, and that the doctrine of forum non conveniens was not applicable.
• Beechwood Music Corp. & Ardmore & Beechwood v. VEE JAY Records, Inc.
  328 F.2d 728· 2d Cir.· 1964-02-19 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the compulsory license provision of the Copyright Act requires use within the United States, not merely manufacture in a foreign country, to trigger the license. The court also found the evidence presented did not sufficiently undermine the plaintiffs' probabi
• Riece Cozart v. Wilson
  236 F.2d 732· D.C. Cir.· 1956-07-12 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the District Court correctly dismissed the petition for a writ of habeas corpus because Japan has jurisdiction over offenses committed within its territory by U.S. service members.
• United States v. Canario-Vilomar
  128 F.4th 1374· 11th Cir.· 2025-02-18 ·cited 1×
  The Eleventh Circuit held that the Maritime Drug Law Enforcement Act (MDLEA) is a constitutional exercise of Congress's authority under the Felonies Clause, and that the Felonies Clause is not limited by international law.
• Odyssey Marine Exploration, Inc. v. Unidentified
  675 F. Supp. 2d 1126· M.D. Fla.· 2009-12-22 ·cited 1×
  The court held that the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (FSIA) bars jurisdiction over the shipwreck and its contents, as they are the property of Spain and not subject to U.S. court adjudication.