Cordis Dow B.V. v. Mecresco

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Cordis Dow B.V. v. Mecresco

451 So. 2d 1015, 1984 Fla. App. LEXIS 13918

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJune 19, 1984

DocketNo. 83-2948

StatusPublished

This text of 451 So. 2d 1015 (Cordis Dow B.V. v. Mecresco) 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

Cordis Dow B.V. v. Mecresco, 451 So. 2d 1015, 1984 Fla. App. LEXIS 13918 (Fla. Ct. App. 1984).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The non-final order denying the motion to dismiss the complaint filed below is affirmed upon a holding that: (a) the sole basis urged below for dismissing the subject complaint as to the non-resident defendants herein was that the complaint failed to allege sufficient facts to invoke Florida’s long-arm statute as to such defendants [defendants’ motion to dismiss, ¶ 4]; (b) plaintiff’s complaint alleges a sufficient basis to invoke the application of Florida’s long-arm statute [§ 48.181, Fla. Stat. (1983) ] as to the non-resident defendants, Fla.R.Civ.P. 1.070(i); and (c) it is unnecessary to reach the other grounds urged herein challenging the trial court’s in per-sonam jurisdiction over the non-resident defendants inasmuch as those grounds were never presented to the trial court. Upon remand, however, these grounds may be raised in the trial court on proper motion by the non-resident defendants.

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

The non-final order denying the motion to dismiss the complaint filed below is affirmed upon a holding that: (a) the sole basis urged below for dismissing the subject complaint as to the non-resident defendants herein was that the complaint failed to allege sufficient facts to invoke Florida’s long-arm statute as to such defendants [defendants’ motion to dismiss, ¶ 4]; (b) plaintiff’s complaint alleges a sufficient basis to invoke the application of Florida’s long-arm statute [§ 48.181, Fla. Stat. (1983) ] as to the non-resident defendants, Fla.R.Civ.P. 1.070(i); and (c) it is unnecessary to reach the other grounds urged herein challenging the trial court’s in per-sonam jurisdiction over the non-resident defendants inasmuch as those grounds were never presented to the trial court. Upon remand, however, these grounds may be raised in the trial court on proper motion by the non-resident defendants.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

451 So. 2d 1015, 1984 Fla. App. LEXIS 13918, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cordis-dow-bv-v-mecresco-fladistctapp-1984.