Moro Aircraft Leasing, Inc. v. International Aviation Marketing, Inc.
206 So. 3d 814
| Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | 2016Background
- Moro Aircraft Leasing, an Alaska corporation, listed an Oregon-based aircraft for sale; International Aviation Marketing, a Florida broker in Sarasota, agreed to act as exclusive agent under a February 2013 marketing/commission agreement.
- Agreement required International Aviation to prepare sales literature and market the aircraft; Moro agreed to pay a $50,000 commission upon sale.
- International Aviation introduced Toss II (Iowa) as a buyer, arranged a pre-buy inspection in Wisconsin, and drafted a May 2013 purchase agreement (selected Oregon law); Moro ultimately closed a separate September 2013 sale in Oklahoma.
- International Aviation sued Moro in Manatee County, Florida, for breach of the marketing agreement alleging failure to pay the $50,000 commission.
- Moro moved to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction; trial court denied the motion. The Second District reviews de novo and reverses, holding Florida lacks constitutional personal jurisdiction over Moro.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Florida courts have personal jurisdiction over Moro under Fla. long‑arm statute and due process (minimum contacts) | International Aviation: contract silent as to place of payment → payment presumed in Florida; long‑arm statute applies and minimum contacts exist because contract was with a Florida resident and services were rendered for the Florida broker | Moro: is nonresident; no Moro representative came to Florida; contract did not require performance in Florida; buyer, inspection, and closing occurred out of state → no purposeful availment or foreseeability of suit in Florida | Court: Long‑arm statute prong satisfied (payment presumed in Florida), but constitutional minimum‑contacts prong not met; reversed dismissal required |
Key Cases Cited
- Bohlander v. Robert Dean & Assocs. Yacht Brokerage, Inc., 920 So. 2d 1226 (Fla. 3d DCA 2006) (minimum‑contacts not satisfied where substantial services were not performed in Florida)
- Venetian Salami Co. v. Parthenais, 554 So. 2d 499 (Fla. 1989) (framework for analyzing long‑arm statute and due process)
- Woodard Chevrolet, Inc. v. Taylor Corp., 949 So. 2d 268 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007) (contract with Florida party and payments to Florida insufficient where services were not performed in Florida)
- Corporacion Aero Angeles, S.A. v. Fernandez, 69 So. 3d 295 (Fla. 4th DCA 2011) (no personal jurisdiction where seller’s contacts with Florida were insufficient despite broker’s Florida activities)