Spanier v. Suisse-Outremer Reederei AG
Cases that cite this one
9 later published cases cite this decision.
- Price v. Point Marine, Inc. (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1992)
- VADIM PIAZENKO v. PIER MARINE INTERIORS GMBH, etc. (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2020)
- Elmlund v. Mottershead (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2000)
- United Shipping Co.(Nassau) Ltd. v. Witmer (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1999)
- Sofrar, S.A. v. Graham Engineering Corp. (United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida 1999)
- Ocean Chemical Transport, Inc. v. Cotton (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1997)
- AM. OVERSEAS MARINE v. Patterson (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1994)
- Hobbs v. Don Mealey Chevrolet, Inc. (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1994)
- Morley v. Lady Allison, Inc. (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1994)
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
Reinhold SPANIER, Appellant,
v.
SUISSE-OUTREMER REEDEREI A.G., and Ecuadorian Line, Inc., Appellees.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
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.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.