White v. Kirsch
This text of 427 So. 2d 1119 (White v. Kirsch) 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.
Opinion
Robert L. WHITE, Appellant,
v.
David M. KIRSCH, Appellee.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
Hendricks & Hendricks and Ben E. Hendricks, Miami, for appellant.
Maland & Turetsky and Eric Turetsky, Miami, for appellee.
Before BARKDULL, HUBBART and JORGENSON, JJ.
PER CURIAM.
The order denying the appellant's motion to dismiss the complaint or quash service below for lack of jurisdiction over the person is affirmed upon a holding that: (a) the complaint herein sufficiently pleads "the basis for service in the language of the statute without pleading the facts supporting service," Fla.R.Civ.P. 1.070(i); and (b) the appellee's affidavit presented below sufficiently establishes that the cause of action sued upon arose out of the appellant's business activities in Florida. § 48.193(1), Fla. Stat. (1981).
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
427 So. 2d 1119, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/white-v-kirsch-fladistctapp-1983.