Prevost Car, Inc. v. Vehicles-R-Us, Inc.

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Prevost Car, Inc. v. Vehicles-R-Us, Inc.

658 So. 2d 668, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 8203, 1995 WL 457186

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedAugust 4, 1995

DocketNo. 95-1282

StatusPublished

This text of 658 So. 2d 668 (Prevost Car, Inc. v. Vehicles-R-Us, Inc.) 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

Prevost Car, Inc. v. Vehicles-R-Us, Inc., 658 So. 2d 668, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 8203, 1995 WL 457186 (Fla. Ct. App. 1995).

Pincite

Opinion

THOMPSON, Judge.

Prevost Car, Inc., a Canadian corporation and a defendant in a civil action filed in Orange County, seeks certiorari review of a discovery order compelling its corporate representative to appear in Orlando for deposition. We grant the petition.

Absent extraordinary circumstances, an out-of-state defendant who has not sought affirmative relief should not be required to travel to Florida in order to be deposed. See Kaufman v. Kaufman, 63 So.2d 196, 200 (Fla.1952); see also Brown v. Brown, 500 So.2d 655, 656 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986); Besco Equip. Co. v. Golden Loaf Bakery, 458 So.2d 330 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984). Prevost has not sought affirmative relief, and respondent, Vehicles-R-Us, Inc., has not demonstrated extraordinary circumstances. We, therefore, quash the discovery order under review.

PETITION GRANTED; ORDER QUASHED.

PETERSON, C.J. and GOSHORN, J., concur.

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

THOMPSON, Judge.

Prevost Car, Inc., a Canadian corporation and a defendant in a civil action filed in Orange County, seeks certiorari review of a discovery order compelling its corporate representative to appear in Orlando for deposition. We grant the petition.

Absent extraordinary circumstances, an out-of-state defendant who has not sought affirmative relief should not be required to travel to Florida in order to be deposed. See Kaufman v. Kaufman, 63 So.2d 196, 200 (Fla.1952); see also Brown v. Brown, 500 So.2d 655, 656 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986); Besco Equip. Co. v. Golden Loaf Bakery, 458 So.2d 330 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984). Prevost has not sought affirmative relief, and respondent, Vehicles-R-Us, Inc., has not demonstrated extraordinary circumstances. We, therefore, quash the discovery order under review.

PETITION GRANTED; ORDER QUASHED.

PETERSON, C.J. and GOSHORN, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

658 So. 2d 668, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 8203, 1995 WL 457186, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/prevost-car-inc-v-vehicles-r-us-inc-fladistctapp-1995.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack