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

• Hilltopper Holding Corp. & Centennial Healthcare Corp. v. Est. OF Cheryl Cutchin
  955 So. 2d 598· Fla. 2d DCA· 2007-03-09 ·cited 59×
  Hilltopper Holding Corporation and Centennial Healthcare Corporation appealed the trial court's denial of their motions to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction in a wrongful death nursing home case. The appellate court reversed, holding that the defendants' affidavits suffic
• Afram Exp. Corp. v. Metallurgiki Halyps, S.A.
  772 F.2d 1358· 7th Cir.· 1985-09-05 ·cited 59×
  The court held that the defendant's contacts with Wisconsin, including the buyer's agent's inspection visit and the F.O.B. Milwaukee delivery term, were sufficient to establish personal jurisdiction under Wisconsin's long-arm statute. The court also affirmed the trial court's cal
• Harlan C. "Bud" Lacy v. Force V Corp.
  403 So. 2d 1050· Fla. 1st DCA· 1981-09-04 ·cited 59×
  Lacy, an Ohio printing equipment seller, appeals the denial of his motion to quash jurisdiction in a breach of contract suit filed by a Florida printing company. The First District Court of Appeal affirmed Florida's exercise of jurisdiction under the long-arm statute, holding tha
• Am. Fin. Trading Corp. v. Bauer
  828 So. 2d 1071· Fla. 4th DCA· 2002-10-23 ·cited 58×
  AFTC and NCCI appealed the trial court's dismissal of their breach of settlement agreement suit against Dr. Bauer for lack of personal jurisdiction. The Fourth District Court of Appeal reversed, holding that Florida courts had personal jurisdiction over the Texas resident defenda
• DeMELO v. Toche Marine, Inc.
  711 F.2d 1260· 5th Cir.· 1983-08-15 ·cited 58×
  The Fifth Circuit held that in a federal question case where service is made under a state long-arm statute, the federal court must apply the state's standard of amenability to jurisdiction, not a federal standard. The court found that the defendant had sufficient contacts with M
• Buckley v. NEW York Post Corp.
  373 F.2d 175· 2d Cir.· 1967-01-10 ·cited 58×·via Minimum Contacts Doctrine
  A state's long-arm statute can constitutionally subject a newspaper to jurisdiction for libelous publications distributed within the state, even if the newspaper's contacts are primarily through circulation and advertising.
• Wash. Cap. Corp. & Jack Wolgin v. Milandco, Ltd., Inc.
  695 So. 2d 838· Fla. 4th DCA· 1997-06-18 ·cited 57×
  Washington Capital Corporation and Jack Wolgin appealed a trial court order denying their motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction. The Florida Fourth District Court of Appeal reversed, holding that the plaintiff failed to meet its burden of establishing long-arm juris
• Osborn v. The Univ. Soc'y, Inc.
  378 So. 2d 873· Fla. 2d DCA· 1979-12-21 ·cited 57×
  A Florida court affirmed dismissal of a breach-of-contract action against a non-resident corporation, holding that despite statutory language permitting jurisdiction, the defendant lacked minimum constitutional contacts with Florida necessary to sustain personal jurisdiction.
• Wilshire OIL Co. OF Tex. v. Riffe
  409 F.2d 1277· 10th Cir.· 1969-04-15 ·cited 57×
  The court held that the Riffes lacked sufficient contacts with Kansas for personal jurisdiction, but the claim against Masterson for breach of fiduciary duty was improperly dismissed for failure to state a claim.
• Int'l Harvester Co. v. Mann
  460 So. 2d 580· Fla. 1st DCA· 1984-12-19 ·cited 56×
  The court held that the trial court properly denied the motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction because the alleged tortious acts causing injury within Florida were sufficient to establish jurisdiction under the long-arm statute.
• Eyerly Aircraft Co. v. Killian
  414 F.2d 591· 5th Cir.· 1969-07-11 ·cited 56×
  The court held that the manufacturer's substantial business contacts with Texas and the foreseeable introduction of its product into the stream of commerce were sufficient to establish personal jurisdiction under the Texas Long Arm statute, even though the injury-causing product
• Standard Fittings Co. v. Sapag, S.A.
  625 F.2d 630· 5th Cir.· 1980-09-11 ·cited 55×
  The court held that Sapag's contacts with Louisiana were sufficient to establish personal jurisdiction under the Louisiana Long-Arm Statute and the Due Process Clause.
• Mr. and Mrs. A. T. Stanga v. McCORMICK Shipping Corp.
  268 F.2d 544· 5th Cir.· 1959-06-25 ·cited 55×
  Service of process on a local travel agency that booked passage for a foreign steamship company is insufficient if the agency is not an agent or employee acting within the scope of authority for business activities within the state. However, a final dismissal is improper if other
• Prejean v. Sonatrach, Inc.
  652 F.2d 1260· 5th Cir.· 1981-08-13 ·cited 54×
  The court held that the Texas Long Arm Statute requires a nexus between the cause of action and the defendant's contacts with Texas, and that the tort did not occur in Texas for statutory purposes. The court also affirmed that due process requires purposeful availment of the foru
• Lakota Girl Scout Council, Inc. v. Havey Fund-Raising Mgmt., Inc.
  519 F.2d 634· 8th Cir.· 1975-06-27 ·cited 54×
  The court held that a district court may assert personal jurisdiction over a dominant shareholder by piercing the corporate veil of their alter ego corporation, and that lost profits are a recoverable measure of damages for breach of contract in Iowa if the fact of loss is clear
• L. D. Reeder Contractors OF Ariz. v. Higgins Indus., Inc.
  265 F.2d 768· 9th Cir.· 1959-03-10 ·cited 54×
  The court held that the defendant manufacturer did not have sufficient minimum contacts with California to be subject to personal jurisdiction there.
• ERL Anger Mills, Inc. v. Cohoes Fibre Mills, Inc.
  239 F.2d 502· 4th Cir.· 1956-11-07 ·cited 54×
  A state statute attempting to subject a foreign corporation to its courts' jurisdiction based solely on a single interstate shipment of goods into the state, where the contract was consummated elsewhere and the corporation transacted no other business in the state, violates the D
• Alexander Proudfoot Co. World Headquarters L.P. v. Thayer
  877 F.2d 912· 11th Cir.· 1989-07-19 ·cited 53×
  A contractual clause consenting to personal jurisdiction is enforceable under Florida law if the defendant's actions satisfy the Florida Long-Arm Statute, even if federal law might otherwise enforce such a clause independently.
• Bangor Punta Operations, Inc. v. Universal Marine Co., Ltd.
  543 F.2d 1107· 5th Cir.· 1976-12-13 ·cited 52×
  The court held that the district court properly exercised personal jurisdiction over the foreign corporate defendant based on the Florida long-arm statute and due process.
• The Dublin Co. v. Peninsular Supply Co.
  309 So. 2d 207· Fla. 4th DCA· 1975-03-14 ·cited 52×·via Minimum Contacts Doctrine
  The Fourth District Court of Appeal reversed a dismissal for lack of jurisdiction, holding that a Pennsylvania corporation's sales of products through Florida distributors and a personal visit by its president to Florida met the requirements of Florida's long-arm statute (F.S. 48
• SEA Lift, Inc. v. Refinadora Costarricense de Petroleo, S.A.
  792 F.2d 989· 11th Cir.· 1986-06-27 ·cited 51×
  The court held that the defendant's contacts with Florida were insufficient to establish personal jurisdiction, as they did not demonstrate purposeful availment of the privilege of conducting activities within the forum state.
• Mouzon v. Mouzon
  458 So. 2d 381· Fla. 5th DCA· 1984-11-01 ·cited 51×
  A Florida appellate court reversed a default judgment dissolving a marriage and awarding custody and child support because the trial court lacked personal jurisdiction over the defendant husband, who was served in North Dakota. The court found the complaint failed to adequately a
• United States v. The Montreal Tr. Co.
  358 F.2d 239· 2d Cir.· 1966-01-06 ·cited 51×
  The court held that the deceased's estate could be subject to New York jurisdiction because the activities of his agents in New York, including contract negotiations and payment disbursements, constituted transacting business within the state under the long-arm statute.
• AETNA Life & Cas. Co. v. Therm-O-Disc, Inc.
  511 So. 2d 992· Fla.· 1987-09-10 ·cited 50×
  The Florida Supreme Court resolved a conflict between two district courts regarding whether Florida's long-arm statute § 48.193(1)(f) permits jurisdiction over nonresident defendants for acts outside the state causing purely economic injury within Florida. The Court held that 'in
• Bloom v. AH Pond Co., Inc.
  519 F. Supp. 1162· S.D. Fla.· 1981-07-27 ·cited 50×
  The court held that it has personal jurisdiction over the corporate defendant but not the individual defendants.
• Washington v. Norton Mfg., Inc.
  588 F.2d 441· 5th Cir.· 1979-01-24 ·cited 50×·via Minimal Contacts
  The court held that the defendant corporation was not 'doing business' in Mississippi, and therefore, the district court lacked personal jurisdiction over it.
• Horace v. Am. Nat'l Bank & Tr. Co. OF Fort Lauderdale
  251 So. 2d 33· Fla. 4th DCA· 1971-08-03 ·cited 50×·via Minimum Contacts Doctrine
  Horace, a nonresident, challenged service of process under Florida's long-arm statute by arguing he was not engaged in a business or business venture within the state. The Fourth District Court of Appeal affirmed that Horace's acts of becoming a guarantor for Travel Coach, Inc.,
• Agrashell, Inc. v. Bernard Sirotta Co.
  344 F.2d 583· 2d Cir.· 1965-04-06 ·cited 50×·via Minimum Contacts Doctrine
• Benjamin v. W. Boat Bldg. Corp.
  472 F.2d 723· 5th Cir.· 1973-01-26 ·cited 49×
  The court held that the defendant's contacts with Louisiana were insufficient to satisfy the 'minimum contacts' requirement for due process, and thus, Louisiana courts could not exercise in personam jurisdiction over the defendant. The court also affirmed the dismissal of the thi
• Citicorp Ins. Brokers (Marine), Ltd. v. J.R. Charman
  635 So. 2d 79· Fla. 1st DCA· 1994-01-20 ·cited 48×
  Citicorp Insurance Brokers and Nelson Hurst Marine appealed an order denying their motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction in a suit by J.R. Charman, a Lloyd's underwriter, who was sued after providing allegedly false insurance coverage representations for a vessel th
• Jones v. Directors Guild OF Am., Inc.
  584 So. 2d 1057· Fla. 1st DCA· 1991-07-30 ·cited 48×
  Jack Jones challenged California arbitration awards and judgments that were recorded as liens on his Florida property, arguing the California court lacked personal jurisdiction over him. The court reversed summary judgment for the appellees and remanded for trial because material
• SUN Bank, N.A. v. E.F. Hutton & Co., Inc.
  926 F.2d 1030· 11th Cir.· 1991-03-15 ·cited 48×
  The court held that the district court lacked personal jurisdiction over Bunstein because his contacts with Florida were fortuitous and not purposefully directed. The court affirmed the district court's judgment against Hutton.
• Engineered Storage Sys., Inc. v. Nat'l Partitions & Interiors, Inc.
  415 So. 2d 114· Fla. 3d DCA· 1982-06-15 ·cited 48×
  Florida courts have jurisdiction over a nonresident defendant for breach of contract occurring in Florida, even if that is the only contact with the state.
• Gardner Eng'g Corp. v. Page Eng'g Co.
  484 F.2d 27· 8th Cir.· 1973-08-01 ·cited 48×
  The court held that personal jurisdiction and venue were proper in Arkansas because the contract had substantial connections to the state, particularly through its place of performance, and that a contract existed despite disputes over delivery dates.
• Volkswagen Interamericana, S.A. v. Rohlsen
  360 F.2d 437· 1st Cir.· 1966-05-17 ·cited 48×·via Minimum Contacts Doctrine
  The court held that the distributor was subject to personal jurisdiction and could be sued under the Automobile Dealers' Day in Court Act, but reversed the damages award due to substantial errors in calculation and jury instructions.
• Wiggins v. Tigrent, Inc.
  147 So. 3d 76· Fla. 2d DCA· 2014-07-30 ·cited 47×
  Wiggins, a Washington resident and manager of WCC, was sued in Florida by Tigrent for conversion and other claims. After Wiggins defaulted and a judgment was entered against him, he moved to vacate the judgment as void for lack of personal jurisdiction. The court held that Wiggin
• Caiazzo v. Am. Royal Arts Corp.
  73 So. 3d 245· Fla. 4th DCA· 2011-06-01 ·cited 47×
  The Fourth District Court of Appeal addressed whether Florida courts have personal jurisdiction over Frank Caiazzo, a Beatles memorabilia dealer, in a defamation, unfair competition, and FDUTPA case brought by American Royal Arts Corp. The court affirmed the trial court's denial
• Robert v. Carida
  424 So. 2d 849· Fla. 4th DCA· 1982-12-08 ·cited 47×
  A cardiologist sued a New Jersey-based cardiologist and Florida hospital officials for defamation, alleging false statements about his cardiac catheterization training. The court reversed the trial court's dismissal for lack of personal jurisdiction, holding that defamatory state
• Great W. United Corp. v. Kidwell
  577 F.2d 1256· 5th Cir.· 1978-08-10 ·cited 47×
  The court held that the Idaho Takeover Statute is preempted by the Williams Act and violates the Commerce Clause, and that personal jurisdiction over the Idaho Director of Finance was proper in Texas.
• Textor v. Bd. OF Regents OF N. Ill. Univ.
  711 F.2d 1387· 7th Cir.· 1983-07-06 ·cited 46×
  The court held that the district court abused its discretion in denying leave to amend the complaint and that the attorneys were denied a fair hearing on the award of attorney's fees.
• DeJAMES v. Magnificence Carriers, Inc.
  654 F.2d 280· 3d Cir.· 1981-07-09 ·cited 46×
  The dissenting judge would hold that Hitachi's contacts with New Jersey satisfy the Fourteenth Amendment due process requirements for personal jurisdiction, distinguishing it from a local dealer. The judge also argues that the Fifth Amendment, not the Fourteenth, governs due proc
• Hazen Research, Inc. v. Omega Minerals, Inc.
  497 F.2d 151· 5th Cir.· 1974-07-12 ·cited 45×
  The court held that the Colorado judgment was entitled to full faith and credit because the Colorado court had properly obtained personal jurisdiction over the defendant.
• Sierra Equity Grp., Inc. v. White Oak Equity P'rs, LLC
  650 F. Supp. 2d 1213· S.D. Fla.· 2009-03-30 ·cited 44×
  The court held that it would defer ruling on personal jurisdiction over the defendants because the jurisdictional issues were intertwined with the merits of the case, and also found that White Oak consented to jurisdiction by contract.
• Scelta v. Delicatessen Support Servs., Inc.
  57 F. Supp. 2d 1327· M.D. Fla.· 1999-06-03 ·cited 44×
  The court held that the plaintiff sufficiently alleged a prima facie case of sexual harassment under Title VII and the FCRA, and that the defendants' motions to dismiss were denied as to those claims.
• Hooks v. Hooks
  771 F.2d 935· 6th Cir.· 1985-08-23 ·cited 44×
• Hydrokinetics, Inc. v. Alaska Mech., Inc.
  700 F.2d 1026· 5th Cir.· 1983-03-21 ·cited 44×
  The exercise of personal jurisdiction in Texas over the Alaska defendant is constitutionally permissible due to purposeful availment and foreseeable consequences in the forum state.
• Sw. Offset, Inc. v. Hudco Publ'g Co., Inc.
  622 F.2d 149· 5th Cir.· 1980-07-23 ·cited 44×
  The court held that the defendant had sufficient minimum contacts with Texas to establish personal jurisdiction, as its actions constituted purposeful availment of the privilege of conducting business in the state.
• Jonnet v. Dollar Sav. Bank of the City of N.Y.
  530 F.2d 1123· 3d Cir.· 1976-01-27 ·cited 44×
  The court held that Pennsylvania's foreign attachment procedures violate procedural due process by allowing quasi-in-rem jurisdiction over debts owed to a foreign corporation without sufficient minimum contacts.
• The NEW York Times Co. v. Connor
  365 F.2d 567· 5th Cir.· 1966-08-04 ·cited 44×·via Minimum Contacts Doctrine
  The dissenting judge believes the court has in personam jurisdiction over the defendant because the allegedly libelous article arose from the defendant's agent's newsgathering activities within the state.
• Nat'l GAS Appliance Corp. v. AB Electrolux
  270 F.2d 472· 7th Cir.· 1959-09-24 ·cited 44×
  The court held that the district court had jurisdiction over the defendant for the breach of contract claim based on the defendant's transaction of business in Illinois, but the conspiracy claim was insufficient. Service of process on the defendant's agent in New York was valid.