Super Service, Inc. v. Larsen

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Super Service, Inc. v. Larsen

791 So. 2d 1118, 2000 Fla. App. LEXIS 15927, 2000 WL 1781065

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedDecember 6, 2000

DocketNo. 4D00-1341

StatusPublished

This text of 791 So. 2d 1118 (Super Service, Inc. v. Larsen) 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

Super Service, Inc. v. Larsen, 791 So. 2d 1118, 2000 Fla. App. LEXIS 15927, 2000 WL 1781065 (Fla. Ct. App. 2000).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We affirm the trial court’s order denying Super Service, Inc.’s motion to dismiss defendant Curtis Lee George, Jr. due to insufficient service of process and for failure to make service within the time period provided in Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.070(j), albeit for a different reason than stated in the trial court’s order. Super Service has no standing to assert either defense as both are personal to defendant George. See Meadows of Citrus County, Inc. v. Jones, 704 So.2d 202, 203 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998)(as to Rule 1.070(j)); Kaufman v. Metro Limo Fund, Inc., 503 So.2d 967 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987). Because appellant has no standing to raise the is[1119]*1119sue, we express no opinion on the validity of service.

Affirmed.

WARNER, C.J., STONE and POLEN, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

We affirm the trial court’s order denying Super Service, Inc.’s motion to dismiss defendant Curtis Lee George, Jr. due to insufficient service of process and for failure to make service within the time period provided in Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.070(j), albeit for a different reason than stated in the trial court’s order. Super Service has no standing to assert either defense as both are personal to defendant George. See Meadows of Citrus County, Inc. v. Jones, 704 So.2d 202, 203 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998)(as to Rule 1.070(j)); Kaufman v. Metro Limo Fund, Inc., 503 So.2d 967 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987). Because appellant has no standing to raise the is[1119]*1119sue, we express no opinion on the validity of service.

Affirmed.

WARNER, C.J., STONE and POLEN, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

791 So. 2d 1118, 2000 Fla. App. LEXIS 15927, 2000 WL 1781065, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/super-service-inc-v-larsen-fladistctapp-2000.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack