Sunseeker International Ltd. v. Devers
2010 Fla. App. LEXIS 19095
| Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | 2010Background
- Plaintiff filed suit against Sunseeker International Limited, its Florida distributor Sunseeker USA, Inc., and a Michigan broker/dealer for defects and related conversion/steal of deposit.
- Sunseeker Ltd. manufactures in the United Kingdom; Sunseeker USA is its Florida distributor; the manufacturer is not alleged to do business in Florida except via distribution channels.
- The verified return of service states service on Sunseeker Ltd. by delivering to its registered agent Kenneth J. Joyce at a Florida address.
- Manufacturer moved to quash service, arguing improper service under Florida statutes and lack of personal jurisdiction; buyer sought jurisdictional discovery.
- Trial court denied the motion; appellate review is de novo on service of process, requiring strict compliance with service statutes.
- Court held the service failed statutory requirements because the distributor was not proven as a business agent or registered agent in Florida; manufacturer had withdrawn Florida registration in 2004.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether service on the distributor satisfied 48.081. | Sunseeker USA was a business agent for the manufacturer. | Distributor was not proven a business agent; manufacturer had no Florida agent. | No; service not proper under 48.081. |
| Whether the return of service was facially defective and invalid. | Return appeared regular; inadvertent defect excused by other proof. | Return shows service on a non-existent Florida agent due to withdrawal in 2004. | Return facially defective; cannot prove service. |
| Whether failure to plead/prove proper service defeats jurisdiction. | Printed secretary of state page suggested registration; distributor as agent. | No proof distributor acted as business agent; no valid registration and agent. | Proved deficient; jurisdiction improper. |
| Whether service on a foreign corporation may be effected by service on an agent transacting business in Florida. | Sunseeker USA conducts business in Florida through distributor. | No evidence of effective agent; long-arm may be improper. | Not satisfied; requires strict compliance. |
Key Cases Cited
- Gleneagle Ship Mgmt. Co. v. Leondakos, 602 So.2d 1282 (Fla. 1992) (allows jurisdiction after proper service discovery)
- Bank of Am., N.A. v. Bornstein, 39 So.3d 500 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010) (strictly construe service; lacks jurisdiction absent proper service)
- Re-Employment Servs., Ltd. v. Nat’l Loan Acquisitions Co., 969 So.2d 467 (Fla. 5th DCA 2007) (regular on its face; defective return cannot prove service)
- Se. Mail Transp., Inc. v. Amoco Oil Co., 402 So.2d 522 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981) (defines business agent for purposes of service)
- Moo Young v. Air Canada, 445 So.2d 1102 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984) (extension motions do not waive jurisdiction on merits)