Minimum Contacts

1,630 Florida cases classified under this topic, plus 103 listed through its narrower topics · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• Durand v. Durand
  569 So. 2d 838· Fla. 3d DCA· 1990-11-06 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the tariff term 'toughened (specially tempered)' in TSUS item 546.38 applies to full-surface tempered glassware with increased shock resistance, and does not require complete dicing upon breakage.
• Wilson v. Humphreys (Cayman) Ltd.
  916 F.2d 1239· 7th Cir.· 1990-10-24 ·cited 12×
  The court held that subject matter jurisdiction exists over a Cayman Islands corporation under alienage jurisdiction and affirmed the denial of forum non conveniens. It remanded for further inquiry into general personal jurisdiction over Holiday Inns.
• Taylor v. Phelan
  912 F.2d 429· 10th Cir.· 1990-08-27 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the plaintiffs made a sufficient prima facie showing of minimum contacts to establish personal jurisdiction over the defendants in Kansas, reversing the district court's dismissal.
• The Falkirk Mining Co. v. The Japan Steel Works
  906 F.2d 369· 8th Cir.· 1990-06-26 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the district court erred in exercising personal jurisdiction over the appellees because they lacked sufficient minimum contacts with the forum state, and the exercise of jurisdiction would offend due process.
• Naviera Mayaca Express S. de R.L. v. Brauer & Assocs., Inc.
  559 So. 2d 1230· Fla. 3d DCA· 1990-04-03 ·cited 12×
  Naviera Mayaca Express, a Honduran shipping company, appealed the dismissal of its negligence suit against Brauer & Associates, an insurance broker, for lack of personal jurisdiction. The Florida appellate court reversed, holding that Brauer's extensive business activities in Flo
• Go-Video, Inc. v. Akai Elec. Co., Ltd.
  885 F.2d 1406· 9th Cir.· 1989-09-05 ·cited 12×
  An antitrust plaintiff serving process under § 12 of the Clayton Act may establish venue under the Alien Venue Act, and personal jurisdiction over alien defendants can be based on their national contacts with the United States.
• Am. Cmty. Mut. Ins. Co. v. Naples Research & Counseling Ctr., Inc.
  534 So. 2d 836· Fla. 2d DCA· 1988-11-30 ·cited 12×
  An out-of-state insurer does not establish minimum contacts sufficient for Florida's longarm jurisdiction merely by issuing a policy to an insured who later seeks treatment in Florida and assigns benefits.
• Rose's Stores, Inc. v. Queen Cherry
  526 So. 2d 749· Fla. 5th DCA· 1988-06-02 ·cited 12×·via Minimum Contacts Doctrine
  Rose's Stores, Inc., a Delaware corporation qualified to do business in Florida, was sued in Volusia County for injuries from an accident occurring in North Carolina. The court held that a foreign corporation qualified to do business in Florida and served on its registered agent
• Saylor v. Dyniewski
  836 F.2d 341· 7th Cir.· 1988-01-06 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the Illinois district court lacked personal jurisdiction over the defendant because the plaintiffs' tort claim did not arise from the defendant's alleged business activities in Illinois. The court also held that the district court did not abuse its discretion
• Ark. Rice Growers Coop. Ass'n v. Alchemy Indus., Inc.
  797 F.2d 565· 8th Cir.· 1986-07-21 ·cited 12×
  The court held that Alchemy and Pitt, Inc. are liable for breach of contract due to faulty plant design, but the individual defendants are not subject to personal jurisdiction in Arkansas.
• Rod Wallace v. Herron
  778 F.2d 391· 7th Cir.· 1985-12-05 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the defendants, California attorneys, lacked sufficient minimum contacts with Indiana to establish personal jurisdiction, even under the 'effects' test, because their actions did not purposefully avail them of Indiana law or create a substantial connection wit
• Trans-Asiatic OIL Ltd. S.A. v. Apex OIL Co.
  743 F.2d 956· 1st Cir.· 1984-09-13 ·cited 12×
  The court held that a maritime attachment under Rule B, even without prior judicial authorization or a bond, does not violate due process if the defendant receives prompt post-attachment notice and a hearing, and the complaint is sufficiently particularized.
• Handley v. Ind. & Mich. Elec. Co.
  732 F.2d 1265· 6th Cir.· 1984-04-26 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the district court had personal jurisdiction over the nonresident corporate defendant under the Kentucky long arm statute because its business activities within Kentucky satisfied the statute's requirements and did not offend due process.
• Congoleum Corp. v. DLW Aktiengesellschaft
  729 F.2d 1240· 9th Cir.· 1984-04-06 ·cited 12×
  The court held that a defendant's limited sales and marketing activities in a forum, conducted through independent representatives and unrelated to the cause of action, are insufficient to establish personal jurisdiction.
• Peanut Corp. OF Am. v. Hollywood Brands, Inc.
  696 F.2d 311· 4th Cir.· 1982-12-15 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the defendant's contacts with Virginia, including soliciting business and engaging in contract negotiations and correspondence within the state, were sufficient to establish personal jurisdiction under Virginia's long-arm statute and satisfy due process requir
• Nat'l CAN Corp. v. K Bev. Co.
  674 F.2d 1134· 6th Cir.· 1982-04-02 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the exercise of personal jurisdiction over the five individual guarantors was constitutionally permissible under Kentucky's long-arm statute, as their actions in guaranteeing a Kentucky business in which they had an economic interest constituted sufficient min
• Schwilm v. Holbrook
  661 F.2d 12· 3d Cir.· 1981-09-28 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the district court abused its discretion in denying the plaintiff's motion to transfer the case to West Virginia, finding West Virginia to be the more appropriate forum.
• Hendrickson v. REG O Co.
  657 F.2d 9· 3d Cir.· 1981-08-03 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the defendant's direct sales, solicitation of business through mailings and phone calls, and provision of technical assistance constituted sufficient contacts with the Virgin Islands to establish personal jurisdiction under the long arm statute and satisfy due
• Bankhead Enters., Inc. v. Norfolk & W. Ry. Co.
  642 F.2d 802· 5th Cir.· 1981-04-15 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the defendant railway company's continuous and systematic business activities in Georgia, including maintaining an office, employees, and soliciting business, constituted 'doing business' under Georgia law and satisfied the due process 'minimum contacts' test,
• Premier Corp. v. Newsom
  620 F.2d 219· 10th Cir.· 1980-04-04 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the defendants did not have sufficient minimum contacts with Colorado to establish personal jurisdiction, and thus the district court correctly dismissed the action.
• Cleveland Compania Maritima v. Pantelis Logothetis
  378 So. 2d 1336· Fla. 2d DCA· 1980-01-18 ·cited 12×
  A Panamanian shipping company challenged venue in a Florida personal injury action brought by one of its employees. The trial court found venue proper in Hillsborough County, and the appellate court affirmed, holding that competent evidence supported findings that the company was
• Lucile Hansen v. Peoples Bank OF Bloomington
  594 F.2d 1149· 7th Cir.· 1979-03-20 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the district court properly dismissed the action for lack of diversity jurisdiction after requiring joinder of the non-diverse remaindermen as indispensable parties under Rule 19.
• H. RAY Baker, Inc. v. Associated Banking Corp.
  592 F.2d 550· 9th Cir.· 1979-03-05 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the defendant bank's maintenance of correspondent accounts in California did not establish sufficient minimum contacts to confer personal jurisdiction.
• Pickens v. Richard and Patricia Hess
  573 F.2d 380· 6th Cir.· 1978-04-10 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the defendants did not have sufficient minimum contacts with Tennessee to subject them to the state's in personam jurisdiction, and thus the district court properly dismissed the action.
• Assocs. Cap. Servs. Corp. v. Loftin's Transfer & Storage Co., Inc.
  554 F.2d 188· 5th Cir.· 1977-06-16 ·cited 12×·via Minimum Contacts Doctrine
  A foreign corporation's isolated contacts with Alabama, primarily through mail and phone, and taking security interests in property located there, do not constitute 'doing business' such that it must qualify to do business in Alabama to maintain a suit.
• Aldens, Inc. v. Bronson C. LaFOLLETTE
  552 F.2d 745· 7th Cir.· 1977-03-25 ·cited 12×
  The application of the Wisconsin Consumer Act to an out-of-state mail-order retailer is constitutional under the Commerce Clause and Due Process Clause.
• Anselmi v. The Denver Post, Inc.
  552 F.2d 316· 10th Cir.· 1977-03-07 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the Wyoming Long-Arm Statute § 5-4.2(a)(iii) applies to claims arising from tortious injury within the state, and that the single publication rule does not preclude personal jurisdiction in the plaintiff's domicile state. Minimum contacts were found sufficient
• Babson Bros. Co. v. Allison
  298 So. 2d 450· Fla. 1st DCA· 1974-07-16 ·cited 12×·via Minimum Contacts Doctrine
  Babson Bros. Co., an Illinois corporation, appealed the denial of its motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction, arguing it had insufficient contacts with Florida to be subject to substituted service under Florida's long arm statute. The court held that Babson's busines
• Caesar's World, Inc. v. Spencer Foods, Inc.
  498 F.2d 1176· 8th Cir.· 1974-06-20 ·cited 12×
  Personal jurisdiction over appellant was lawfully acquired through the Iowa long-arm statute because the contract had a substantial connection to Iowa and appellant had sufficient minimum contacts with the state.
• B & J Mfg. Co. v. Solar Indus., Inc.
  483 F.2d 594· 8th Cir.· 1973-08-01 ·cited 12×
  The court held that sending letters threatening patent infringement litigation constituted transacting business in Minnesota, establishing personal jurisdiction over the defendant under the state's long-arm statute.
• Burchett v. Bardahl OIL Co. & Nance & Assocs., Ltd.
  470 F.2d 793· 10th Cir.· 1972-12-15 ·cited 12×·via Minimum Contacts Doctrine
  The court held that the trial court did not err in finding sufficient contacts to establish jurisdiction over the non-resident corporation under Oklahoma's long-arm statutes, based on the alleged distributorship and business activities within the state.
• Anderson v. M. E. (Panama) Shiflett
  435 F.2d 1036· 10th Cir.· 1971-01-04 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the district court did not acquire personal jurisdiction over the defendant under Oklahoma's long arm statutes because the defendant did not purposefully avail himself of the privilege of conducting activities within Oklahoma.
• Scheidt v. Spike Young and Victoria F. Young
  389 F.2d 58· 3d Cir.· 1968-01-05 ·cited 12×
  The court held that peripheral contacts with New Jersey were insufficient to establish minimum contacts for personal jurisdiction.
• Kourkene v. Am. BBR, Inc.
  313 F.2d 769· 9th Cir.· 1963-01-15 ·cited 12×·via Minimum Contacts Doctrine
  The court held that service of process on Ryerson was invalid because Ryerson was a licensee, not an agent, and that the appellee was not 'doing business' in California, thus quashing service through the Secretary of State was proper.
• Roumel v. Drill Well OIL Co.
  270 F.2d 550· 5th Cir.· 1959-09-30 ·cited 12×
  A Texas state court cannot obtain personal jurisdiction over a non-resident defendant through substituted service under Rule 108 of its Rules of Civil Procedure for the purpose of rendering a personal judgment.
• W. H. Elliott & Sons Co., Inc. v. Nuodex Prods. Co., Inc.
  243 F.2d 116· 1st Cir.· 1957-03-26 ·cited 12×·via Minimum Contacts Doctrine
  The exercise of personal jurisdiction over a foreign corporation is permissible if its activities within the state are sufficiently connected to the cause of action, consistent with due process.
• Kahn v. The Maico Co.
  216 F.2d 233· 4th Cir.· 1954-10-13 ·cited 12×
  A foreign corporation is considered 'doing business' in Maryland for jurisdictional purposes if it exercises substantial control over a local distributor's business, even if sales are technically made outside the state.
• Pfm Air, Inc. v. Dr. Ing. Hc. F. Porsche Ag
  751 F. Supp. 2d 1264· M.D. Fla.· 2010-10-07 ·cited 11×
  The court held that it has personal jurisdiction over Defendant PAG because its subsidiaries' continuous and systematic contacts with Florida can be imputed to PAG, and that PAG's request for interlocutory appeal is denied as it does not present a pure question of law.
• Biloki v. Majestic Greeting Card Co., Inc.
  33 So. 3d 815· Fla. 4th DCA· 2010-04-28 ·cited 11×
  A Florida appellate court reversed the trial court's denial of a motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction, holding that a Florida greeting card company failed to establish sufficient minimum contacts with North Dakota residents who briefly visited Florida to execute a
• Autonation, Inc. v. Whitlock
  2003 WL 21919876· S.D. Fla.· 2003-08-01 ·cited 11×
  The court held that it has personal jurisdiction over the defendant based on his substantial and systematic business contacts with Florida and the presence of forum selection clauses in relevant agreements.
• Stomar, Inc. v. Lucky Seven Riverboat Co., L.L.C.
  821 So. 2d 1183· Fla. 4th DCA· 2002-07-24 ·cited 11×
  A Florida ship broker sued a nonresident vessel seller and individual defendants for breach of a brokerage agreement and fraudulent inducement. The trial court dismissed all defendants for lack of personal jurisdiction. The appellate court reversed the dismissal of the business e
• Gerling Global Reinsurance Corp. OF Am. v. Gallagher
  267 F.3d 1228· 11th Cir.· 2001-10-02 ·cited 11×
  The Eleventh Circuit affirmed the district court's grant of summary judgment, holding that Florida's Holocaust Victims Insurance Act, as applied to the plaintiffs, violates the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The court found that the Act's reporting provisions, wh
• Thomas Jefferson Univ. v. Lisajane Romer and Kevin Romer as Natural Parents and Guardians of Mathew Romer
  710 So. 2d 67· Fla. 4th DCA· 1998-04-01 ·cited 11×
  Florida has personal jurisdiction over a non-resident defendant that processes biological materials used in the ordinary course of business in Florida under section 48.193(1)(f)(2), where the defendant has sufficient minimum contacts with the state to satisfy constitutional due p
• Roldos v. Americargo Lines, Inc.
  698 So. 2d 1368· Fla. 3d DCA· 1997-09-17 ·cited 11×
  Jose Emilio Bruzzone Roldos, an Ecuadorian citizen, appeals the denial of his motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction and forum non conveniens in a contract dispute with a Florida corporation. The court reversed, holding that a nonresident defendant's purchases of goo
• L.O.T.I. Grp. Prods. v. Lund
  907 F. Supp. 1528· S.D. Fla.· 1995-10-26 ·cited 11×
  The court held that the defendant's contacts with Florida were insufficient to establish personal jurisdiction under the Florida Long Arm Statute and the Due Process Clause.
• Sylvio Tabet v. Tabet
  644 So. 2d 557· Fla. 3d DCA· 1994-10-12 ·cited 11×
  A judgment creditor sought to enforce a California divorce judgment against his ex-wife's property interest in Florida real estate titled to a German entity. The trial court dismissed for lack of personal jurisdiction, but the appellate court reversed, holding that a judgment deb
• John Posey Corp. v. R.J.T. Eng'g, Inc.
  617 So. 2d 441· Fla. 5th DCA· 1993-04-30 ·cited 11×
  John Posey Corporation appeals the dismissal of its fraud and breach of contract complaint against Arizona defendants for lack of personal jurisdiction. The trial court found insufficient minimum contacts with Florida, but the appellate court reversed because conflicting affidavi
• Hamilton v. Bus. Assistance Consortium, Inc.
  602 So. 2d 619· Fla. 3d DCA· 1992-07-07 ·cited 11×
  Dr. Hamilton appealed the denial of his motion to dismiss and quash service for lack of personal jurisdiction over a guaranty claim in Florida. The court held that Hamilton had sufficient minimum contacts with Florida to support jurisdiction because he guaranteed loans for a Flor
• Boit v. Gar-Tec Prods., Inc.
  967 F.2d 671· 1st Cir.· 1992-06-05 ·cited 11×
  The court held that the plaintiffs failed to make a prima facie showing of personal jurisdiction because they did not provide sufficient evidence that the defendant sold the product at issue to a distributor who then sold it within the forum state.
• Kingston Square Tenants Ass'n v. Tuskegee Gardens, Ltd.
  792 F. Supp. 1566· S.D. Fla.· 1992-05-26 ·cited 11×
  The court held that tenants cannot bring an implied cause of action under federal housing statutes for monetary damages and that tort claims for economic losses arising from a contract breach are barred by the economic loss rule.