KFD Aviation, Inc. v. Knight Aero Corp.

District Court of Appeal of Florida

KFD Aviation, Inc. v. Knight Aero Corp.

612 So. 2d 727, 1993 Fla. App. LEXIS 1624, 1993 WL 31974

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedFebruary 9, 1993

DocketNo. 92-1761

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 612 So. 2d 727 (KFD Aviation, Inc. v. Knight Aero Corp.) 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

KFD Aviation, Inc. v. Knight Aero Corp., 612 So. 2d 727, 1993 Fla. App. LEXIS 1624, 1993 WL 31974 (Fla. Ct. App. 1993).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The defendants, KFD Aviation, Inc. [KFD] and Bariven Corporation [Bariven], appeal from a non-final order denying their amended motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction. We affirm in part, reverse in part and remand for further proceedings.

We affirm as to KFD since the plaintiff’s complaint alleges a sufficient jurisdictional basis to comply with Florida’s long-arm statute and KFD has had sufficient minimum contacts with the State of Florida. See Venetian Salami Co. v. Parthenais, 554 So.2d 499 (Fla.1989); Ben M. Hogan Co., Inc. v. QDA Investment Corp., 570 So.2d 1349 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990).

We reverse as to Bariven since it lacked sufficient minimum contacts with Florida, and therefore, maintenance of suit in this state would “offend traditional notions of [728]*728fair play and substantial justice. Venetian Salami, 554 So.2d at 500 (citing International Shoe Co. v. Washington, 326 U.S. 310, 66 S.Ct. 154, 90 L.Ed. 95 (1945)). Since we have determined that Bariven lacked sufficient minimum contacts with Florida, we do not need to address whether the complaint alleges sufficient jurisdictional facts to comply with this state’s long-arm statute.

Reversed in part, affirmed in part and remanded for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

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

PER CURIAM.

The defendants, KFD Aviation, Inc. [KFD] and Bariven Corporation [Bariven], appeal from a non-final order denying their amended motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction. We affirm in part, reverse in part and remand for further proceedings.

We affirm as to KFD since the plaintiff’s complaint alleges a sufficient jurisdictional basis to comply with Florida’s long-arm statute and KFD has had sufficient minimum contacts with the State of Florida. See Venetian Salami Co. v. Parthenais, 554 So.2d 499 (Fla.1989); Ben M. Hogan Co., Inc. v. QDA Investment Corp., 570 So.2d 1349 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990).

We reverse as to Bariven since it lacked sufficient minimum contacts with Florida, and therefore, maintenance of suit in this state would “offend traditional notions of [728]*728fair play and substantial justice. Venetian Salami, 554 So.2d at 500 (citing International Shoe Co. v. Washington, 326 U.S. 310, 66 S.Ct. 154, 90 L.Ed. 95 (1945)). Since we have determined that Bariven lacked sufficient minimum contacts with Florida, we do not need to address whether the complaint alleges sufficient jurisdictional facts to comply with this state’s long-arm statute.

Reversed in part, affirmed in part and remanded for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

612 So. 2d 727, 1993 Fla. App. LEXIS 1624, 1993 WL 31974, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kfd-aviation-inc-v-knight-aero-corp-fladistctapp-1993.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack