Professional Patient Transp., Inc. v. Fink
Cases that cite this one
11 later published cases cite this decision.
- Pellerito Foods, Inc. v. American Conveyors Corp. (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1989)
- Jefferson S & L Ass'n v. Greenman Group Inc. (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1988)
- Engineered Storage Systems, Inc. v. National Partitions & Interiors, Inc. (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1982)
- Kreisler Manufacturing Corp. v. Homstad Goldsmith, Inc. (Minn. 1982)
- American Foam Industries, Inc. v. Mastercraft Carpet Industries, Inc. (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1982)
- Feldman v. Magnetix Corp. (Md. Ct. Spec. App. 1981)
- Thompson v. King (United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida 1981)
- Mary Chevrolet Co. v. Southeast First Leasing, Inc. (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1981)
- CARIBE & PANAMA INVS. v. Christensen (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1979)
- Jerome Alexander Cosmetics, Inc. v. Roth (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1979)
- Rollins Nursing Home, Inc. v. M & LC/Stillwell Mortgage Co. (Ark. 1979)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion
PROFESSIONAL PATIENT TRANSPORTATION, INC., Appellant,
v.
Manny FINK, Mrs. David Bengen, Widow of David Bengen, and the Estate of David Bengen, Jointly, Severally, and Individually, Appellees.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
*210 David S. Wieder, Miami, for appellant.
Schwartz, Klein & Steinhardt and Norman S. Klein, North Miami Beach, for appellees.
Before PEARSON, HUBBART and SCHWARTZ, JJ.
SCHWARTZ, Judge.
The trial judge quashed the service of process attempted upon the nonresident defendants, under the Florida long-arm statute, notwithstanding the allegation in the complaint that they had breached their agreement to make payment in the State of Florida for services rendered to them by the plaintiff outside the state. As the court held in the controlling case of Madax International Corp. v. Delcher Intercontinental Moving Services, Inc., 342 So.2d 1082 (Fla. 2d DCA 1977), this breach, which amounted to the defendants' "failure to perform acts required by the contract to be performed in this state," under Fla. Stat. § 48.193(1)(g), (1975), was sufficient to confer Florida jurisdiction over the defendants. The order under review is therefore reversed and the cause remanded for further consistent proceedings.
Reversed and remanded.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.