Puerto v. Mid-Gulf Services, Inc.

519 So. 2d 689, 13 Fla. L. Weekly 323, 1988 Fla. App. LEXIS 334, 1988 WL 6052
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided February 2, 1988·No. No. 87-2507·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The appellees are, without dispute, foreign corporations not authorized to do business in the State of Florida, are thus without the venue privilege afforded by Section 47.051, Florida Statutes (1985), and may, accordingly, be called upon to defend this transitory action in any county where jurisdiction over them has been obtained. United Engines, Inc. v. Citmoco Services, Inc., 418 So.2d 409 (Fla.2d DCA 1982); Hollywood Memorial Park, Inc. v. Rosart, 124 So.2d 712 (Fla.3d DCA 1960). This being so, the order under review which upon the appellees’ motion changed the venue of the appellant’s action to Hillsborough County is sustainable only if the appellees showed below that Dade County is a forum non conveniens. The record before us is sorely lacking in this regard.

Reversed and remanded for further proceedings.

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

Puerto v. Mid-Gulf Services, Inc., 519 So. 2d 689, 13 Fla. L. Weekly 323, 1988 Fla. App. LEXIS 334, 1988 WL 6052 (Fla. Ct. App. 1988).

519 So. 2d 689 (Puerto v. Mid-Gulf Services, Inc.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Holton v. Prosperity Bank
602 So. 2d 659 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1992)