Gulf Oil Corp. v. Poole

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Gulf Oil Corp. v. Poole

426 So. 2d 1254, 1983 Fla. App. LEXIS 18598

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedFebruary 10, 1983

DocketNo. AP-70

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 426 So. 2d 1254 (Gulf Oil Corp. v. Poole) 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

Gulf Oil Corp. v. Poole, 426 So. 2d 1254, 1983 Fla. App. LEXIS 18598 (Fla. Ct. App. 1983).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The trial court’s order denying the motion to dismiss by Key International Drilling and Keydril for lack of personal jurisdiction is REVERSED and the case is remanded with instructions to dismiss the action against those defendants. The documents tendered to us in appellee’s appendix, in an effort to show that those corporations are “mere instrumentalities” of Gulf, are not shown to be part of the record below. Those documents, therefore, cannot refute appellants’ proof that there is no basis for asserting jurisdiction over Keydril and Key International Drilling under the long-arm statute. § 48.193, Fla.Stat. (1981); Hyco Manufacturing Co. v. Rotex International Corp., 355 So.2d 471 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978).

The trial court’s order is AFFIRMED insofar as it denied the motion to dismiss by appellant Gulf for improper venue. The proof offered by Gulf does not negate the existence of proper venue in Walton County under section 47.051, Florida Statutes (1981), in the suit remaining against Gulf alone. See Inverness Coca-Cola Bottling Co. v. McDaniel, 78 So.2d 100, 102 (Fla.1955).

AFFIRMED in part and REVERSED in part.

ROBERT P. SMITH, Jr., C.J., LARRY G. SMITH and THOMPSON, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

The trial court’s order denying the motion to dismiss by Key International Drilling and Keydril for lack of personal jurisdiction is REVERSED and the case is remanded with instructions to dismiss the action against those defendants. The documents tendered to us in appellee’s appendix, in an effort to show that those corporations are “mere instrumentalities” of Gulf, are not shown to be part of the record below. Those documents, therefore, cannot refute appellants’ proof that there is no basis for asserting jurisdiction over Keydril and Key International Drilling under the long-arm statute. § 48.193, Fla.Stat. (1981); Hyco Manufacturing Co. v. Rotex International Corp., 355 So.2d 471 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978).

The trial court’s order is AFFIRMED insofar as it denied the motion to dismiss by appellant Gulf for improper venue. The proof offered by Gulf does not negate the existence of proper venue in Walton County under section 47.051, Florida Statutes (1981), in the suit remaining against Gulf alone. See Inverness Coca-Cola Bottling Co. v. McDaniel, 78 So.2d 100, 102 (Fla.1955).

AFFIRMED in part and REVERSED in part.

ROBERT P. SMITH, Jr., C.J., LARRY G. SMITH and THOMPSON, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

426 So. 2d 1254, 1983 Fla. App. LEXIS 18598, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gulf-oil-corp-v-poole-fladistctapp-1983.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack