Spanier v. Suisse-Outremer Reederei AG

557 So. 2d 83, 1990 WL 6484
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedJanuary 30, 1990
Docket88-1825
StatusPublished
Cited by9 cases

This text of 557 So. 2d 83 (Spanier v. Suisse-Outremer Reederei AG) 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
Spanier v. Suisse-Outremer Reederei AG, 557 So. 2d 83, 1990 WL 6484 (Fla. Ct. App. 1990).

Opinion

557 So.2d 83 (1990)

Reinhold SPANIER, Appellant,
v.
SUISSE-OUTREMER REEDEREI A.G., and Ecuadorian Line, Inc., Appellees.

No. 88-1825.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

January 30, 1990.
Rehearing Denied March 23, 1990.

Brett Rivkind, Miami, for appellant.

Mitchell, Harris, Horr & Associates, David Horr and Jonathan W. Skipp, Miami, for appellees.

Before SCHWARTZ, C.J., and JORGENSON and LEVY, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

In this seaman's personal injury action which arose at sea and has no "connexity" to this state, the trial court held that the defendants' vessel's sporadic visits and other contacts with Florida did not constitute the "continuous and systematic" activity necessary to sustain a claim of personal jurisdiction under section 48.193(2), Florida Statutes (1985) (requiring "substantial and not isolated activity within this state"). We agree. See Helicopteros Nacionales de Colombia, S.A. v. Hall, 466 U.S. 408, 104 S.Ct. 1868, 80 L.Ed.2d 404 (1984); Ranger Nationwide, Inc. v. Cook, 519 So.2d 1087 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988), review denied, 531 So.2d 167 (Fla. 1988). Compare Mitsubishi Shoji Kaisha v. MS Galini, 323 F. Supp. 79 (S.D.Tex. 1971) (sustaining Texas action arising in Texas); Hoodye v. Bruusgaard Krosterud Skibs A/S Drammen, Norway, 197 F. Supp. 697 (S.D.Tex. 1961) (same).

The other basis of asserted jurisdiction is likewise without merit.

Affirmed.

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

Related

VADIM PIAZENKO v. PIER MARINE INTERIORS GMBH, etc.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2020
Elmlund v. Mottershead
750 So. 2d 736 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2000)
Sofrar, S.A. v. Graham Engineering Corp.
35 F. Supp. 2d 919 (S.D. Florida, 1999)
United Shipping Co.(Nassau) Ltd. v. Witmer
724 So. 2d 722 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1999)
Ocean Chemical Transport, Inc. v. Cotton
702 So. 2d 1272 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1997)
Hobbs v. Don Mealey Chevrolet, Inc.
642 So. 2d 1149 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1994)
Morley v. Lady Allison, Inc.
633 So. 2d 1173 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1994)
AM. OVERSEAS MARINE v. Patterson
632 So. 2d 1124 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1994)
Price v. Point Marine, Inc.
610 So. 2d 1339 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1992)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
557 So. 2d 83, 1990 WL 6484, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/spanier-v-suisse-outremer-reederei-ag-fladistctapp-1990.