Frist v. Schwarz

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Frist v. Schwarz

524 So. 2d 710, 13 Fla. L. Weekly 1058, 1988 Fla. App. LEXIS 1750, 1988 WL 40534

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMay 4, 1988

DocketNo. 87-1918

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 524 So. 2d 710 (Frist v. Schwarz) 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

Frist v. Schwarz, 524 So. 2d 710, 13 Fla. L. Weekly 1058, 1988 Fla. App. LEXIS 1750, 1988 WL 40534 (Fla. Ct. App. 1988).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from an order determining that the Court has personal jurisdiction over three Tennessee citizens, Thomas Frist, Jr., Nat Winston and Thomas Frist, Sr.

We reverse because the complaint fails to include sufficient factual allegations as a basis for such jurisdiction and because these three defendants lack the requisite minimum contacts with the State of Florida to satisfy due process requirements. Bloom v. A.H. Pond Co., 519 F.Supp. 1162, 1168-1171 (S.D.Fla.1981); Bank of Wessington v. Winters Government Securities Corporation, 361 So.2d 757, 760 (Fla. 4th DCA 1978); McLean Financial Corporation v. Winslow Loudermilk Corporation, 509 So.2d 1373 (Fla. 5th DCA 1987); Excel Handbag Company v. Edison Brothers Stores, Inc., 428 So.2d 348, 350 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983).

REVERSED.

GLICKSTEIN, WALDEN and GUNTHER, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from an order determining that the Court has personal jurisdiction over three Tennessee citizens, Thomas Frist, Jr., Nat Winston and Thomas Frist, Sr.

We reverse because the complaint fails to include sufficient factual allegations as a basis for such jurisdiction and because these three defendants lack the requisite minimum contacts with the State of Florida to satisfy due process requirements. Bloom v. A.H. Pond Co., 519 F.Supp. 1162, 1168-1171 (S.D.Fla.1981); Bank of Wessington v. Winters Government Securities Corporation, 361 So.2d 757, 760 (Fla. 4th DCA 1978); McLean Financial Corporation v. Winslow Loudermilk Corporation, 509 So.2d 1373 (Fla. 5th DCA 1987); Excel Handbag Company v. Edison Brothers Stores, Inc., 428 So.2d 348, 350 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983).

REVERSED.

GLICKSTEIN, WALDEN and GUNTHER, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

524 So. 2d 710, 13 Fla. L. Weekly 1058, 1988 Fla. App. LEXIS 1750, 1988 WL 40534, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/frist-v-schwarz-fladistctapp-1988.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack