Pilawski v. Habel

718 So. 2d 398, 1998 Fla. App. LEXIS 12906, 1998 WL 712926
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedOctober 14, 1998
DocketNo. 98-1813
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 718 So. 2d 398 (Pilawski v. Habel) 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
Pilawski v. Habel, 718 So. 2d 398, 1998 Fla. App. LEXIS 12906, 1998 WL 712926 (Fla. Ct. App. 1998).

Opinion

POLEN, J.

Renee Pilawski appeals from a nonfinal order denying her motion to dismiss a complaint pursuant to Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.070(j), and finding that her filing of the motion resulted in her acceptance of service of process. Although we affirm the [399]*399court’s denying the motion to dismiss, we reverse that part of the order finding Pilaw-ski submitted to the court’s jurisdiction by filing the motion to dismiss. The law is clear that a party does not subject himself to the court’s jurisdiction by merely filing a Rule 1.070(j) motion to dismiss. Honorat v. Genova, 579 So.2d 286, 287 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991).1

REVERSED and REMANDED for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

STEVENSON, J., and OWEN, WILLIAM C., Jr., Senior Judge, concur.

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

Related

APAC, Inc. v. Muller
889 So. 2d 894 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2004)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
718 So. 2d 398, 1998 Fla. App. LEXIS 12906, 1998 WL 712926, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/pilawski-v-habel-fladistctapp-1998.