Russo Securities, Inc. v. Food Concepts, Inc.

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Russo Securities, Inc. v. Food Concepts, Inc.

707 So. 2d 942, 1998 Fla. App. LEXIS 2655, 1998 WL 191141

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMarch 18, 1998

DocketNo. 97-2975

StatusPublished

This text of 707 So. 2d 942 (Russo Securities, Inc. v. Food Concepts, 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

Russo Securities, Inc. v. Food Concepts, Inc., 707 So. 2d 942, 1998 Fla. App. LEXIS 2655, 1998 WL 191141 (Fla. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM

As to appellants Russo Securities, Inc., Karvi Corporation, Patrick Russo, Joseph Colangelo and Karlton Zamost, we affirm the trial court’s order denying the defendants’ [943]*943motion to quash service of process and to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction. However, we reverse that order as to appellant Alan Berkun only. Appellee has failed to establish that Alan Berkun had sufficient minimum contacts in the State of Florida to establish jurisdiction. See Venetian Salami Co. v. Parthenais, 554 So.2d 499 (Fla.1989); see also International Shoe Co. v. Washington, 326 U.S. 310, 66 S.Ct. 154, 90 L.Ed. 95 (1945).

AFFIRMED IN PART; REVERSED IN PART and REMANDED for further proceedings.

DELL, POLEN and SHAHOOD, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM

As to appellants Russo Securities, Inc., Karvi Corporation, Patrick Russo, Joseph Colangelo and Karlton Zamost, we affirm the trial court’s order denying the defendants’ [943]*943motion to quash service of process and to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction. However, we reverse that order as to appellant Alan Berkun only. Appellee has failed to establish that Alan Berkun had sufficient minimum contacts in the State of Florida to establish jurisdiction. See Venetian Salami Co. v. Parthenais, 554 So.2d 499 (Fla.1989); see also International Shoe Co. v. Washington, 326 U.S. 310, 66 S.Ct. 154, 90 L.Ed. 95 (1945).

AFFIRMED IN PART; REVERSED IN PART and REMANDED for further proceedings.

DELL, POLEN and SHAHOOD, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

707 So. 2d 942, 1998 Fla. App. LEXIS 2655, 1998 WL 191141, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/russo-securities-inc-v-food-concepts-inc-fladistctapp-1998.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack