MATHIEU LACAILE v. PATRICK LESUR

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedMay 19, 2021
Docket20-1248
StatusPublished

This text of MATHIEU LACAILE v. PATRICK LESUR (MATHIEU LACAILE v. PATRICK LESUR) 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
MATHIEU LACAILE v. PATRICK LESUR, (Fla. Ct. App. 2021).

Opinion

Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida

Opinion filed May 19, 2021. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

________________

No. 3D20-1248 Lower Tribunal No. 20-8809 ________________

Mathieu Lacaile, et al., Appellants,

vs.

Patrick Lesur, et al., Appellees.

An Appeal from a non-final order from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Jose M. Rodriguez, Judge.

Entin Law Group, P.A., and Joshua M. Entin (Fort Lauderdale); Clark Hill PLC, and K.J. Edward Fornell (Detroit, MI), for appellants.

Paul A. McKenna & Associates, P.A., and Andrew H. Braaksma, for appellees.

Before LOGUE, HENDON, and MILLER, JJ.

LOGUE, J.

We affirm without extended discussion the trial court’s order denying

the appellants’ motion to dismiss for forum non conveniens. The trial court’s well-reasoned discussion of the private and public interest factors compels

affirmance. In affirming, however, we expressly disapprove those portions of

the order finding that Michigan is not an adequate alternative forum.

“[A]n alternative forum does not have to be equivalent to the chosen

forum to be adequate.” Cortez v. Palace Resorts, Inc., 123 So. 3d 1085, 1092

(Fla. 2013). Instead, dismissal is inappropriate “where the alternative forum

does not permit litigation of the subject matter of the dispute.” Kinney Sys.,

Inc. v. Cont’l Ins. Co., 674 So. 2d 86, 90 (Fla. 1996).

While Michigan does not have a specific equivalent statute for judicial

expulsion of a member from a limited liability company, there is nothing in

section 605.0602, Florida Statutes, that would prevent another jurisdiction

from enforcing its provisions. We have no doubt that our respected

counterparts in Michigan are equally capable of interpreting and applying

Florida law. See, e.g., Zantop Int’l Airlines, Inc. v. Eastern Airlines, 503 N.W.

2d 915, 919–22 (Mich. Ct. App. 1993) (applying Florida indemnification law);

Klingman Furniture Co. v. Leslie E. Tassell Tr., No. 282727, 2009 WL

350871 (Mich. Ct. App. 2009) (applying Florida statute in case involving

Florida estate).

Affirmed.

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

Related

Kinney System, Inc. v. Continental Ins. Co.
674 So. 2d 86 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1996)
Zantop International Airlines, Inc. v. Eastern Airlines
503 N.W.2d 915 (Michigan Court of Appeals, 1993)
Cortez v. Palace Resorts, Inc.
123 So. 3d 1085 (Supreme Court of Florida, 2013)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
MATHIEU LACAILE v. PATRICK LESUR, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mathieu-lacaile-v-patrick-lesur-fladistctapp-2021.