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

• TEN Mile Indus. Park v. W. Plains Serv. Corp.
  810 F.2d 1518· 10th Cir.· 1987-02-02 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the appellees did not have sufficient minimum contacts with Wyoming to establish personal jurisdiction, and therefore the district court's dismissal of the claims against them was proper.
• Spiro Giotis v. Apollo OF THE Ozarks, Inc.
  800 F.2d 660· 7th Cir.· 1986-09-04 ·cited 22×
  The court held that allowing manufacturers Apollo and Red Rocket to be sued in Wisconsin violates due process because they did not purposefully avail themselves of the forum state's jurisdiction.
• Wegerer v. First Commodity Corp. OF Boston
  744 F.2d 719· 10th Cir.· 1984-09-10 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the majority erred in finding sufficient evidence for conspiracy and applying the alter ego doctrine to establish personal jurisdiction over the individual defendants.
• Time Share Vacation Club v. Atl. Resorts, Ltd.
  735 F.2d 61· 3d Cir.· 1984-05-24 ·cited 22×
  The dissenting judge believes the plaintiff's allegations were sufficient to establish minimum contacts for Pennsylvania jurisdiction and that an evidentiary hearing should have been held.
• Fitzsimmons v. Barton
  589 F.2d 330· 7th Cir.· 1979-01-05 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the district court erred in applying state long-arm statute principles to a federal securities fraud action, as federal law provides for nationwide service of process.
• Hutter N. Tr. v. Door Cnty. Chamber OF Commerce
  403 F.2d 481· 7th Cir.· 1968-11-05 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the Door County Chamber of Commerce's substantial advertising and solicitation activities in Illinois constituted transacting business, subjecting it to personal jurisdiction under the Illinois long-arm statute. However, the individual defendants were not subj
• Taylor v. Portland Paramount Corp.
  383 F.2d 634· 9th Cir.· 1967-09-12 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the defendant's alleged conduct, occurring outside of Oregon and not purposefully availing herself of Oregon's laws, did not establish sufficient minimum contacts to justify personal jurisdiction under the state's long-arm statute, thus violating due process.
• The Curtis Publ'g Co. v. Felice Golino
  383 F.2d 586· 5th Cir.· 1967-08-17 ·cited 22×
• Charilaos Gkiafis v. Steamship Yiosonas
  342 F.2d 546· 4th Cir.· 1965-02-02 ·cited 22×
  Maryland law permits substituted service on a foreign corporation whose ship made sporadic but commercially significant visits to the state, if such jurisdiction is constitutionally permissible under the Fourteenth Amendment's due process clause.
• Kaye-Martin v. Pierce P. Brooks
  267 F.2d 394· 7th Cir.· 1959-06-15 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the defendant's limited activity in Illinois, which was for the convenience of attending a convention and not for the purpose of transacting business out of which the cause of action arose, did not constitute "the transaction of any business within this State"
• Wsaz, Inc. v. Lyons
  254 F.2d 242· 6th Cir.· 1958-04-07 ·cited 22×
  A foreign corporation broadcasting into a state, soliciting advertising, and entering into contracts for that advertising, is considered to be 'doing business' in that state for jurisdictional purposes, even if its physical operations are outside the state.
• Verizon Trademark Servs., LLC v. Producers, Inc.
  810 F. Supp. 2d 1321· M.D. Fla.· 2011-08-25 ·cited 21×
  The court granted the motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction, finding insufficient contacts with Florida under the long-arm statute and due process.
• Corporacion Aero Angeles, S.A. v. Jaime Gaston Fernandez & Fernandez Aviation, LLC
  69 So. 3d 295· Fla. 4th DCA· 2011-04-20 ·cited 21×
  A Mexican aircraft corporation challenged a trial court's denial of its motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction in a breach of contract action by a Florida broker seeking an unpaid commission on the sale of the corporation's airplane. The court reversed, holding that
• Martin Acquadro, M.D. v. Bergeron
  778 So. 2d 1034· Fla. 4th DCA· 2001-02-07 ·cited 21×
  Massachusetts residents appealed an order denying their motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction in a Florida defamation and malicious prosecution case. The Fourth District Court of Appeal affirmed, holding that because defendants did not deny making telephone communic
• Sutton v. Smith
  603 So. 2d 693· Fla. 1st DCA· 1992-08-21 ·cited 21×
  Sutton, a professional golfer, sued a Michigan partnership and its members for breach of a sponsorship agreement that required them to provide health insurance coverage, which they failed to do, leading to Sutton incurring substantial medical debt. The court reversed the trial co
• Girardeau A. Spann v. Colonial Vill., Inc.
  899 F.2d 24· D.C. Cir.· 1990-03-13 ·cited 21×
  The court held that the organizational plaintiffs have standing to sue under the Fair Housing Act and that their appeal was timely filed. The court also found that personal jurisdiction over MLDC was properly established through service on its subsidiary.
• LAK, Inc. v. Deer Creek Enters.
  885 F.2d 1293· 6th Cir.· 1989-09-20 ·cited 21×
  The court held that the defendant partnership did not purposefully avail itself of the privilege of transacting business in Michigan, and therefore, Michigan courts could not exercise personal jurisdiction over it.
• Travelers Indem. Co. v. Calvert Fire Ins. Co.
  798 F.2d 826· 5th Cir.· 1986-08-29 ·cited 21×
  The court held that the district court erred in exercising personal jurisdiction over The London Club due to insufficient minimum contacts with Louisiana, but affirmed the reformation of the indemnity agreement based on mutual mistake.
• Newton v. Bryan
  433 So. 2d 577· Fla. 5th DCA· 1983-05-26 ·cited 21×
  The appellate court reversed the trial court's denial of the Newtons' motion to abate for lack of personal jurisdiction, finding that the promissory note was not required to be performed in Florida.
• Compania Anonima Simantob v. Bank OF Am. Int'l OF Fla.
  373 So. 2d 68· Fla. 3d DCA· 1979-07-03 ·cited 21×
  The court held that executing a contract of guaranty in Florida constitutes 'doing business' under the long-arm statute, and the defendant failed to meet its burden to challenge jurisdiction.
• Clark Equip. Co. & Clark Equip. v. Keller
  570 F.2d 778· 8th Cir.· 1978-02-17 ·cited 21×
  The court affirmed the district court's findings regarding CEAG's personal jurisdiction and the validity of the 503 patent, finding no error in the analysis of prior art or obviousness.
• Aguacate Consol. Mines, Inc. v. Deeprock, Inc.
  566 F.2d 523· 5th Cir.· 1978-01-19 ·cited 21×
  A federal court can transfer a case under 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a) or § 1404(a) even if it lacks personal jurisdiction over the defendant, and this applies to cases removed from state court.
• Briggs v. Goodwin
  569 F.2d 1· D.C. Cir.· 1977-09-21 ·cited 21×
  The court held that 28 U.S.C. § 1391(e) provides venue for suits against federal officials acting under color of legal authority, even when seeking money damages, and allows for extraterritorial service by certified mail.
• Gen. Cigar Holdings, Inc. v. Altadis, S.A.
  205 F. Supp. 2d 1335· S.D. Fla.· 2002-06-12 ·cited 20×
  The court held that Altadis, S.A. lacks sufficient minimum contacts with Florida to establish personal jurisdiction, despite allegations of tortious conduct within the state. The court also found that Altadis U.S.A.'s activities could not be imputed to Altadis, S.A. to establish
• Dean v. Dale K. Johns, M.D.
  789 So. 2d 1072· Fla. 1st DCA· 2001-06-18 ·cited 20×
  A Florida appellate court reversed a summary judgment dismissing a medical malpractice claim against an Alabama-based neurologist, holding that Florida courts have personal jurisdiction over the defendant physician under the long-arm statute and Florida law applies to the dispute
• Pool v. Brewer
  602 So. 2d 1264· Fla.· 1992-06-25 ·cited 20×
  The Florida Supreme Court held that the Georgia Insurers Insolvency Pool (GIIP) lacks personal jurisdiction in Florida courts despite stepping into the shoes of an insolvent insurer (Allied) that had minimum contacts with Florida. The court rejected the argument that an insolvent
• FMC Corp. v. Varonos
  892 F.2d 1308· 7th Cir.· 1990-01-11 ·cited 20×
  The court held that Varonos's communications to FMC in Illinois, containing misrepresentations in furtherance of her fraudulent scheme, subjected her to personal jurisdiction under the Illinois long-arm statute and due process. The court also held that the district court abused i
• Pytlik v. Prof'l Res., Ltd.
  887 F.2d 1371· 10th Cir.· 1989-10-10 ·cited 20×
  The court affirmed dismissal of claims against Italiana for lack of personal jurisdiction, affirmed summary judgment for INA, affirmed summary judgment on claims two, three, four, and five against other defendants, but reversed the directed verdict on the wrongful discharge claim
• Frist v. Schwarz
  524 So. 2d 710· Fla. 4th DCA· 1988-05-04 ·cited 20×
• Umphrey H. Bowling, Jr. v. Founders Title Co.
  773 F.2d 1175· 11th Cir.· 1985-10-15 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the statute of limitations for civil RICO claims accrues when a plaintiff knows or should know of the injury, barring claims filed too late. It also affirmed personal jurisdiction and choice of law for a fraud claim.
• Bond Leather Co., Inc. v. Q.T. Shoe MFG. Co., Inc.
  764 F.2d 928· 1st Cir.· 1985-06-18 ·cited 20×
  The court held that M.N., Inc. lacked sufficient minimum contacts with Massachusetts for personal jurisdiction under due process, but affirmed findings of fraud and statutory violations against Martin Nadler and Q-T.
• Rubaii v. Lakewood Pipe OF Tex., Inc.
  695 F.2d 541· 11th Cir.· 1983-01-14 ·cited 20×
  Dr. Rubaii sued Lakewood Pipe in federal court for breach of contract and tort claims arising from a failed Iraqi oil contract transaction. The Eleventh Circuit affirmed dismissal for lack of personal jurisdiction, holding that res judicata barred relitigation of the jurisdiction
• Leney v. Plum Grove Bank
  670 F.2d 878· 10th Cir.· 1982-02-19 ·cited 20×
  The court held that asserting personal jurisdiction over an Illinois bank in Colorado for a letter of credit transaction violated due process because the bank lacked sufficient minimum contacts with Colorado.
• Quasha v. Shale Dev. Corp.
  667 F.2d 483· 5th Cir.· 1982-02-12 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the plaintiffs established sufficient minimum contacts with Louisiana to justify personal jurisdiction and that maintaining the suit there does not offend traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice.
• Iowa Elec. Light & Power Co. v. Atlas Corp.
  603 F.2d 1301· 8th Cir.· 1979-08-22 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the defendant lacked sufficient minimum contacts with Iowa to support personal jurisdiction, even if Iowa's long-arm statute was technically satisfied by the plaintiff's performance within the state.
• Chilton Thorington and Harmon Wages v. Cash
  494 F.2d 582· 5th Cir.· 1974-05-20 ·cited 20×
  The court held that sending material misrepresentations into Georgia, upon which the plaintiff relied, constituted a "tortious act within" the state under the Georgia long-arm statute, satisfying due process requirements for personal jurisdiction.
• Block Indus. v. DHJ Indus., Inc.
  495 F.2d 256· 8th Cir.· 1974-04-10 ·cited 20×
  The court held that a plaintiff seeking to establish personal jurisdiction under a long-arm statute based on a tort committed within the state must make a prima facie showing of the defendant's connection to the injury and minimum contacts with the forum state.
• Litvak Meat Co. v. Baker
  446 F.2d 329· 10th Cir.· 1971-07-12 ·cited 20×
  The court held that Penn Central had sufficient minimum contacts in Colorado for jurisdiction and that the Carmack Amendment does not preempt all common law negligence claims by shippers.
• Ratliff v. Cooper Labs., Inc.
  444 F.2d 745· 4th Cir.· 1971-06-29 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the defendants' minimal contacts with South Carolina were insufficient to establish in personam jurisdiction for claims arising outside the state and unrelated to those contacts, violating due process.
• Tetco Metal Prods., Inc. v. Langham
  387 F.2d 721· 5th Cir.· 1968-01-15 ·cited 20×·via Minimum Contacts Doctrine
  The court held that the manufacturer did not have sufficient minimum contacts with Alabama to establish jurisdiction under the state's long-arm statute, and thus the district court erred in denying the motion to quash service of process.
• Adolph Caso v. Lafayette Radio Elecs. Corp.
  370 F.2d 707· 1st Cir.· 1966-12-27 ·cited 20×
  A federal court in a diversity case must apply state law to determine if a foreign corporation is "doing business" for personal jurisdiction, and "mere solicitation" is insufficient if the cause of action is unrelated to the solicitation activities in the state.
• Dragor Shipping Corp. v. Union Tank CAR Co.
  361 F.2d 43· 9th Cir.· 1966-04-07 ·cited 20×·via Minimum Contacts Doctrine
  The court held that the Arizona District Court lacked personal jurisdiction over the defendant because the lawsuit concerning a settlement agreement and promissory note executed in New York did not arise out of or involve business done or transactions in Arizona, thus violating d
• Nettie Lou Dooly v. Payne
  326 F.2d 941· 5th Cir.· 1964-01-21 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the Broaster Company did not have sufficient minimum contacts with Alabama to be subject to its jurisdiction under the state's substituted service statute.
• Edwin Raphael Co., Inc. v. Maharam Fabrics Corp.
  283 F.2d 310· 7th Cir.· 1960-11-01 ·cited 20×·via Minimal Contacts
  The court held that the order vacating default and quashing service was appealable and that the defendant did not have sufficient contacts with Illinois to be subject to its jurisdiction.
• Scholnik v. Nat'l Airlines, Inc.
  219 F.2d 115· 6th Cir.· 1955-02-04 ·cited 20×
  A foreign corporation can be subject to jurisdiction in a state if its activities, even if conducted through an agent or partner, create sufficient minimum contacts with the forum state, and service of process on a managing agent of a related entity is valid.
• Emp'rs' Liab. Assur. Corp. v. Lejeune
  189 F.2d 521· 5th Cir.· 1951-05-25 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the Excess insurer was not subject to jurisdiction in Louisiana because service of process was insufficient, and affirmed the judgment against the Employers insurer.
• WH Smith, PLC v. Benages & Assocs., Inc.
  51 So. 3d 577· Fla. 3d DCA· 2010-12-29 ·cited 19×
  WH Smith PLC appeals the trial court's denial of its motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction based on an alter ego theory. The Florida Third District Court of Appeal reversed, holding that Benages failed to establish the required elements to pierce the corporate veil
• Neely Kountze v. Kountze
  996 So. 2d 246· Fla. 2d DCA· 2008-12-12 ·cited 19×
  Neely Kountze appealed an order denying his motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction in a case where his cousin Edward sued him for recording a telephone conversation without consent in violation of Florida's Security of Communications Act. The court reversed, holding
• Radcliffe v. Gyves
  902 So. 2d 968· Fla. 4th DCA· 2005-06-08 ·cited 19×
  Former officers and directors of a Florida corporation appealed a trial court's denial of their motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction in a shareholder class action. The appellate court reversed, finding that the defendants' affidavits sufficiently contested jurisdic
• Carlyle v. Palm Beach Polo Holdings, Inc.
  842 So. 2d 1013· Fla. 4th DCA· 2003-04-16 ·cited 19×
  The Fourth District Court of Appeal reversed the trial court's denial of a nonresident defendant's motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction. Although Florida's long-arm statute permits jurisdiction based on communications into Florida, the court held that the cause of