Atlas Aircraft Corporation v. Buckingham

302 So. 2d 163, 1974 Fla. App. LEXIS 8396
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedOctober 25, 1974
Docket74-439
StatusPublished
Cited by8 cases

This text of 302 So. 2d 163 (Atlas Aircraft Corporation v. Buckingham) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Atlas Aircraft Corporation v. Buckingham, 302 So. 2d 163, 1974 Fla. App. LEXIS 8396 (Fla. Ct. App. 1974).

Opinion

302 So.2d 163 (1974)

ATLAS AIRCRAFT CORPORATION, Appellant,
v.
Marcia BUCKINGHAM et al., Appellees.

No. 74-439.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

October 25, 1974.

*164 Michael B. Davis, Walton, Lantaff, Schroeder, Carson & Wahl, West Palm Beach, for appellant.

Wm. Bruce Harper, Jr., Frates, Floyd, Pearson, Stewart, Proenza & Richman, Miami, for appellees.

PER CURIAM.

Upon examination of the pleadings and papers in the appellate record and after consideration of the briefs and oral argument, we are of the opinion that the trial court erred in denying defendant-appellant's motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction. The motion to dismiss and the evidence adduced in the sworn affidavit in support thereof established a prima facie showing that the defendant's conduct and actions did not make it amenable to service of process under Florida's long-arm statute, section 48.181, F.S. See Viking Superior Corporation v. W.T. Grant Company, Fla.App. 1968, 212 So.2d 331. Upon such a showing the burden shifted to the plaintiff to support the allegations of its complaint by way of evidence in opposition to the affidavit (which the plaintiff failed to do in the proceedings below). Defendant's motion should, therefore, have been granted.

Accordingly, the order denying defendant's motion to dismiss is vacated and set aside and the cause remanded to the trial court with the respectful direction to enter an order granting defendant's motion to dismiss with leave to the plaintiff to take such other action by pleading or proof as deemed appropriate.

Reversed and remanded.

WALDEN and MAGER, JJ., and SMITH, CULVER, Associate Judge, concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Acquadro v. Bergeron
851 So. 2d 665 (Supreme Court of Florida, 2003)
Prentice v. PRENTICE COLOUR, INC.
779 F. Supp. 578 (M.D. Florida, 1991)
Weatherhead Co. v. Coletti
392 So. 2d 1342 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1980)
ABL Realty Corp. v. Cohl
384 So. 2d 1351 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1980)
Hyco Mfg. Co. v. Rotex Intern. Corp.
355 So. 2d 471 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1978)
Simboli v. Miller
326 So. 2d 251 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1976)
Hoffmann v. THREE THOUSAND S. ASSOC., INC.
318 So. 2d 486 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1975)
Dublin Company v. Peninsular Supply Company
309 So. 2d 207 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1975)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
302 So. 2d 163, 1974 Fla. App. LEXIS 8396, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/atlas-aircraft-corporation-v-buckingham-fladistctapp-1974.