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

• Reinauer v. Greenman Advertising Assocs., Inc.
  503 So. 2d 975· Fla. 4th DCA· 1987-03-11 ·cited 8×
  The Fourth District Court of Appeal reversed the trial court's denial of appellants' motion to quash service of process and dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction. The court held that Louisiana residents and a Louisiana corporation had insufficient minimum contacts with Florid
• Small v. Sheba Invs., Inc.
  811 F.2d 1163· 7th Cir.· 1987-02-18 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the Illinois long-arm statute, which requires the claim to arise from the transaction of business within the state, did not grant personal jurisdiction over the defendant in this case.
• R.L. Lipton Distrib. Co. (85-3921) v. Dribeck Importers, Inc.
  811 F.2d 967· 6th Cir.· 1987-02-17 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the distributors failed to establish personal jurisdiction over the importer because the importer's contacts with Ohio were insufficient and the cause of action did not arise from those contacts.
• Micromedia v. Automated Broadcast Controls
  799 F.2d 230· 5th Cir.· 1986-09-12 ·cited 8×
  The court held that it had personal jurisdiction over the appellant and that the statute of frauds barred recovery on the System 80 contract, but remanded for a new trial on damages for the interim system, allowing ABC to recover the purchase price.
• Seville Fin., Inc. v. Nationwide Mktg. Assocs., Inc.
  488 So. 2d 658· Fla. 4th DCA· 1986-05-21 ·cited 8×
  Seville Financial appeals a trial court order finding it subject to in personam jurisdiction in Florida under the long-arm statute. The Fourth District Court of Appeal reverses, holding that Seville's minimal contacts with Florida—an oral phone call to arrange services, an agreem
• Butcher's Union Local NO. 498 v. SDC Inv., Inc.
  788 F.2d 535· 9th Cir.· 1986-04-23 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the plaintiffs failed to establish personal jurisdiction over the nonresident defendants, either under RICO's nationwide service provision or under traditional grounds based on California law.
• Colwell Realty Invs., Inc. v. Triple T Inns OF Ariz., Inc.
  785 F.2d 1330· 5th Cir.· 1986-04-04 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the defendant's contacts with Texas were insufficient to establish personal jurisdiction, as the defendant did not purposefully avail itself of the forum state's laws.
• Gray v. Michael T. O'Brien & the Sugarloaf Mountain Corp.
  777 F.2d 864· 1st Cir.· 1985-12-03 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the plaintiff failed to establish personal jurisdiction over the defendant under the Massachusetts long-arm statute because the injury did not arise from the defendant's transaction of business in Massachusetts.
• Vault Corp. v. Quaid Software Ltd.
  775 F.2d 638· 5th Cir.· 1985-11-01 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the defendant's national marketing and 510 sales of its software in Louisiana established sufficient minimum contacts to satisfy due process requirements for personal jurisdiction.
• Montalbano v. Easco Hand Tools, Inc.
  766 F.2d 737· 2d Cir.· 1985-07-09 ·cited 8×
  The court held that dismissal of OH Industries for improper service was proper, but the dismissal of Nannen American Manufacturing Corporation for lack of personal jurisdiction required further findings regarding Nannen's contacts with New York.
• Henry Heide, Inc. v. WRH Prods. Co., Inc.
  766 F.2d 105· 3d Cir.· 1985-06-27 ·cited 8×
  The court held that New Jersey law bars commercial buyers from suing in tort for economic loss, limiting them to UCC warranty claims, and that factual disputes preclude summary judgment on certain warranty claims.
• Precision Constr. Co. v. J.A. Slattery Co., Inc.
  765 F.2d 114· 8th Cir.· 1985-06-13 ·cited 8×
• Tenn. Farmers Mut. Ins. Co. v. Sheliah Meador
  467 So. 2d 471· Fla. 5th DCA· 1985-04-18 ·cited 8×
  Tennessee Farmers Mutual Insurance Company appeals from an order denying its motion to quash service of process in a case brought by Sheliah Meador for insurance benefits. The court reversed, holding that a non-resident insurance company lacks minimum contacts with Florida when a
• Blue Ridge Bank v. Veribanc, Inc.
  755 F.2d 371· 4th Cir.· 1985-02-22 ·cited 8×
  The court held that Veribanc's actions established sufficient minimum contacts with Virginia under the long-arm statute and due process, allowing for personal jurisdiction.
• The Am. Freedom Train Found. v. Spurney
  747 F.2d 1069· 1st Cir.· 1984-11-08 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the district court lacked personal jurisdiction over the defendants because their contacts with Massachusetts were insufficient to satisfy the Massachusetts long-arm statute and the "minimum contacts" test.
• C & H Transp. Co., Inc. v. Jensen & Reynolds Constr. Co. & Par Indus., Inc.
  719 F.2d 1267· 5th Cir.· 1983-11-21 ·cited 8×
  The court held that exercising jurisdiction over Jensen & Reynolds in Texas would offend due process because its contacts with the state were insufficient to establish purposeful availment.
• Sales Serv. Inc. v. Daewoo Int'l (America) Corp.
  719 F.2d 971· 8th Cir.· 1983-11-01 ·cited 8×
  The court held that Daewoo's activities in Missouri, conducted through its housewares division president, constituted the transaction of business within the state, satisfying the requirements for personal jurisdiction.
• Columbia Briargate Co. v. First Nat'l Bank IN Dallas
  713 F.2d 1052· 4th Cir.· 1983-08-10 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the fiduciary shield doctrine does not constitutionally prevent jurisdiction over a non-resident agent who commits a tort within the forum state, especially when the state's long-arm statute extends to the limits of due process.
• Vishay Intertechnology, Inc. v. DELTA Int'l Corp.
  696 F.2d 1062· 4th Cir.· 1982-12-13 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the North Carolina long-arm statute and due process permit personal jurisdiction over a California corporation whose telephone and written communications into North Carolina constituted tortious conduct giving rise to the plaintiff's claims.
• S. L. Indus., Inc. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  673 F.2d 1· 1st Cir.· 1982-02-22 ·cited 8×
  Venue is improper in this circuit because the petitioners do not 'transact business' within the meaning of the National Labor Relations Act, as their contacts are limited to sales and a single sales representative arrangement without any physical presence.
• Haile-Appellant v. Henderson Nat'l Bank
  657 F.2d 816· 6th Cir.· 1981-08-13 ·cited 8×
  The court held that federal district courts may exercise in personam jurisdiction over citizens without regard to their contacts with the specific district, as long as they have minimum contacts with the United States.
• Aycock v. La. Aircraft, Inc.
  617 F.2d 432· 5th Cir.· 1980-05-19 ·cited 8×
  The court held that Mississippi's long arm statute, when read in conjunction with section 79-1-27, allows for personal jurisdiction over a foreign corporation doing business in Mississippi, even if the cause of action did not arise from that specific business activity.
• Chlebda v. H. E. Fortna & Brother, Inc.
  609 F.2d 1022· 1st Cir.· 1979-11-29 ·cited 8×
  The court held that a defendant's failure to act outside the forum state, without more, does not establish minimum contacts for personal jurisdiction, and a plaintiff must provide affirmative proof beyond the pleadings to establish jurisdiction.
• First Nat'l Bank OF Searcy v. Collins
  372 So. 2d 111· Fla. 2d DCA· 1979-05-18 ·cited 8×
  This case concerns whether a Florida court must recognize an Arkansas default judgment against Florida residents. The appellate court reversed the trial court's dismissal, holding that the Arkansas court had properly exercised personal jurisdiction over the appellees.
• Aero Mech. Elec. Craftsman & Pac. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Parent
  366 So. 2d 1268· Fla. 4th DCA· 1979-02-07 ·cited 8×·via Minimal Contacts
  In this interlocutory appeal of a products liability case, the Fourth District Court of Appeal reversed the denial of a foreign manufacturer's motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction. The court held that Florida's Long Arm Statute requires a manufacturer to have reaso
• Telco Leasing, Inc. v. Marshall Cnty. Hosp.
  586 F.2d 49· 7th Cir.· 1978-11-01 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the defendant hospital did not have sufficient minimum contacts with Illinois to establish personal jurisdiction under the state's long-arm statute and due process clause.
• Am. Baseball CAP, Inc. v. Duzinski
  359 So. 2d 483· Fla. 1st DCA· 1978-05-09 ·cited 8×
  American Baseball Cap, Inc. appeals the denial of its motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction. The court holds that plaintiffs failed to establish sufficient contacts between the Pennsylvania defendant and Florida under the substituted service statute, even though def
• Chem LAB Prods., Inc. v. Stepanek
  554 F.2d 371· 9th Cir.· 1977-05-23 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the defendant lacked sufficient minimum contacts with California to justify the exercise of personal jurisdiction.
• R. T. Eckles in Bankruptcy for Mountain States Sports v. Sharman
  548 F.2d 905· 10th Cir.· 1977-02-03 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the trial court erred in directing a verdict on contract validity and enforceability, as these were factual questions for the jury, and that the judgments against the defendants must be reversed.
• Cook v. FOX
  537 F.2d 370· 9th Cir.· 1976-05-25 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the Arizona district court lacked personal jurisdiction over the defendants because the events giving rise to the complaint did not occur in Arizona, nor did the defendants have sufficient contacts with Arizona.
• Arthur v. Hous., Inc.
  508 F.2d 562· 5th Cir.· 1975-02-21 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the defendant's contacts with Texas, consisting solely of mail communications and payments related to a North Carolina real estate transaction, were insufficient to establish minimum contacts for personal jurisdiction.
• George v. Strick Corp.
  496 F.2d 10· 10th Cir.· 1974-04-26 ·cited 8×
  The court held that Oklahoma's long-arm statute requires the cause of action to arise from the defendant's activities within the state, even if the defendant transacts other business there.
• Ellec Mosley v. Nationwide Purchasing, Inc.
  485 F.2d 418· Temp. Emer. Ct. App.· 1973-10-09 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the District Court correctly dismissed the action against Kuni for lack of personal jurisdiction and correctly transferred the venue for the action against Nationwide to Detroit, Michigan.
• Hamilton Bros., Inc. v. Peterson
  445 F.2d 1334· 5th Cir.· 1971-07-20 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the defendant's minimal contacts with Florida were insufficient to establish personal jurisdiction under the state's long-arm statute.
• Doyn Aircraft, Inc. v. Wylie
  443 F.2d 579· 10th Cir.· 1971-06-04 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the defendant transacted sufficient business in Kansas to establish personal jurisdiction and that the trial court did not err in awarding attorney's fees or finding personal liability.
• Maxwell Sayet, M.D. v. Interstate Blood Bank, Inc.
  245 So. 2d 142· Fla. 3d DCA· 1971-02-23 ·cited 8×
  The court held that a foreign corporation systematically selling blood products to Florida customers for pecuniary benefit is "doing business" in the state and amenable to service of process under the long-arm statute.
• Peterson v. U-Haul Co.
  409 F.2d 1174· 8th Cir.· 1969-04-25 ·cited 8×·via Minimum Contacts Doctrine
  The court held that U-Haul Co. was not subject to jurisdiction in Nebraska under either the Non-Resident Motor Vehicle Statute or the Business Corporation Act because its activities did not constitute 'operation' or 'use' of a vehicle in the state, nor did it meet the 'doing busi
• Leach Co. v. Gen. Sani-Can Mfg. Corp.
  393 F.2d 183· 7th Cir.· 1968-03-27 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the district court did not commit clear error in disregarding the corporate separateness of General Sani-Can Manufacturing Corporation and Sani-Can Midwest Co. for purposes of jurisdiction, venue, and service of process.
• Lomas & Nettleton Fin. Corp. v. ALL Coverage Underwriters, Inc.
  200 So. 2d 564· Fla. 4th DCA· 1967-06-30 ·cited 8×
  A Delaware finance corporation challenged Florida's exercise of personal jurisdiction over it for a breach of contract action related to mortgage brokerage services. The court affirmed the trial court's denial of the corporation's motion to dismiss and motion to quash service of
• Mech. Contractors Ass'n OF Am., Inc. v. Mech. Contractors Ass'n OF N. Cal., Inc.
  342 F.2d 393· 9th Cir.· 1965-02-08 ·cited 8×·via Minimum Contacts Doctrine
  The court held that the National Association's activities in California, including sponsoring a rival association and interfering with the Local, constituted 'doing business' sufficient to establish minimum contacts for valid service of process under California law and the Fourte
• Cooke-Waite Labs., Inc. v. Napier
  166 So. 2d 675· Fla. 2d DCA· 1964-08-05 ·cited 8×
  Cooke-Waite Laboratories, a Delaware corporation, appeals the denial of its motion for summary judgment on jurisdictional grounds in a products liability case involving a defective hypodermic needle. The court reverses, holding that the sale of hypodermic needles to a Florida dis
• Consol. Jewelers, Inc. v. Standard Fin. Corp.
  325 F.2d 31· 6th Cir.· 1963-12-05 ·cited 8×·via Minimum Contacts Doctrine
  The court held that a contract's choice of law provision is enforceable if the chosen state has a reasonable relation to the transaction and the parties acted in good faith.
• Waltham Precision Instrument Co., Inc. v. McDONNELL Aircraft Corp.
  310 F.2d 20· 1st Cir.· 1962-11-13 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the defendant's single purchase transaction in Massachusetts did not constitute 'doing business' under the state statute, thus precluding jurisdiction.
• Harris v. Deere & Co.
  223 F.2d 161· 4th Cir.· 1955-06-13 ·cited 8×·via Minimum Contacts Doctrine
  A parent corporation is not considered to be doing business in a state merely because its wholly-owned subsidiary sells the parent's products there, if the separate corporate entities are maintained and the subsidiary purchases the goods it sells.
• Rucker v. Great Dane Petroleum Contractors, Inc.
  343 F. Supp. 3d 1304· M.D. Fla.· 2021-05-17 ·cited 7×
  Venue is proper in the Middle District of Florida because the defendant corporation conducted business there, and exercising personal jurisdiction comports with due process and fairness, thus the motion to dismiss or transfer is denied.
• Emrit v. Universal Music Grp.
  2019 WL 6251365· M.D. Fla.· 2020-08-17 ·cited 7×
  The court granted the motion to dismiss, finding it lacked personal jurisdiction over Universal Music Group and that the complaint constituted a shotgun pleading.
• Imerys Talc Am., Inc. v. Johnson & Johnson
  262 So. 3d 799· Fla. 4th DCA· 2018-12-19 ·cited 7×
  A manufacturer that sells a component part to a company in one state, which then incorporates that component into a finished product sold in a third state, lacks sufficient minimum contacts with the third state to support specific personal jurisdiction, absent the manufacturer's
• The Sampson Farm Ltd. P'ship v. Parmenter
  238 So. 3d 387· Fla. 3d DCA· 2018-01-17 ·cited 7×
  A defendant that timely asserts a jurisdictional challenge does not waive it by actively defending the case on the merits through an answer and motion for summary judgment, as these are defensive rather than affirmative relief. A trial court lacks personal jurisdiction over a for
• Cornerstone Inv. Funding, LLC v. Painted Post Grp., Inc.
  188 So. 3d 904· Fla. 4th DCA· 2016-03-16 ·cited 7×
  A defendant's mere failure to pay on a contract requiring payment in Florida does not, by itself, establish sufficient minimum contacts with the state to satisfy due process for personal jurisdiction.
• Telesur v. DOT (SR), Inc.
  100 So. 3d 1232· Fla. 2d DCA· 2012-11-14 ·cited 7×
  Telesur appeals a circuit court's denial of its motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction. The Florida appellate court reversed, holding that DOT (SR) failed to allege sufficient jurisdictional facts under Florida's long-arm statute to establish jurisdiction over the no