Gorham Construction Co. v. Superior Fertilizer & Chemical Co.

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Gorham Construction Co. v. Superior Fertilizer & Chemical Co.

218 So. 2d 516, 1969 Fla. App. LEXIS 6295

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedFebruary 10, 1969

DocketNo. 2465

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 218 So. 2d 516 (Gorham Construction Co. v. Superior Fertilizer & Chemical Co.) 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

Gorham Construction Co. v. Superior Fertilizer & Chemical Co., 218 So. 2d 516, 1969 Fla. App. LEXIS 6295 (Fla. Ct. App. 1969).

Pincite

Opinion

OWEN, Judge.

Defendant appeals an order denying its motion to dismiss for improper venue. We affirm.

Defendant corporation had its principal place of business in St. Lucie County. It owed a sum of money to P. & H. Grassing, Inc., a corporation with its principal place of business in Palm Beach County. No place of payment was specified and hence, upon default in payment, the cause of action for the debt accrued in Palm Beach County. Saf-T-Clean, Inc. v. Martin-Marietta Corp., Fla.1967, 197 So.2d 8; M. A. Kite Co. v. A. C. Samford, Inc., Fla.App.1961, 130 So.2d 99; Croker v. Powell, 1934, 115 Fla. 733, 156 So. 146.

P. & H. Grassing, Inc., did not file suit, but assigned the debt to plaintiff, a corporation having its principal place of business in Hillsborough County. The cause of action having accrued in Palm Beach County, plaintiff had the right to maintain its suit in that county since by virtue of the assignment it stood in the shoes of its assignor. Fred S. Conrad Construction Co. v. Exchange Bank, Fla.App. 1965, 178 So.2d 217.

Affirmed.

CROSS and McCAIN, JJ., concur.

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

OWEN, Judge.

Defendant appeals an order denying its motion to dismiss for improper venue. We affirm.

Defendant corporation had its principal place of business in St. Lucie County. It owed a sum of money to P. & H. Grassing, Inc., a corporation with its principal place of business in Palm Beach County. No place of payment was specified and hence, upon default in payment, the cause of action for the debt accrued in Palm Beach County. Saf-T-Clean, Inc. v. Martin-Marietta Corp., Fla.1967, 197 So.2d 8; M. A. Kite Co. v. A. C. Samford, Inc., Fla.App.1961, 130 So.2d 99; Croker v. Powell, 1934, 115 Fla. 733, 156 So. 146.

P. & H. Grassing, Inc., did not file suit, but assigned the debt to plaintiff, a corporation having its principal place of business in Hillsborough County. The cause of action having accrued in Palm Beach County, plaintiff had the right to maintain its suit in that county since by virtue of the assignment it stood in the shoes of its assignor. Fred S. Conrad Construction Co. v. Exchange Bank, Fla.App. 1965, 178 So.2d 217.

Affirmed.

CROSS and McCAIN, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

218 So. 2d 516, 1969 Fla. App. LEXIS 6295, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gorham-construction-co-v-superior-fertilizer-chemical-co-fladistctapp-1969.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack