Metropolitan Inv. Corp. v. Buchler, 90-2384

• Decision Date: 12 February 1991
• Docket Number: No. 90-2384,90-2384
• Citation: 16 Fla. L. Weekly 471,575 So.2d 262
• Parties: 16 Fla. L. Weekly 471 METROPOLITAN INVESTMENT CORP., Appellant, v. David Julian BUCHLER and Ian Peter Phillips, as Administrators of Havelet Leasing, Ltd., etc., Appellees.
• Court: Florida District Court of Appeals

Page 262

575 So.2d 262

16 Fla. L. Weekly 471

METROPOLITAN INVESTMENT CORP., Appellant, v. David Julian BUCHLER and Ian Peter Phillips, as Administrators of Havelet Leasing, Ltd., etc., Appellees.

No. 90-2384.

District Court of Appeal of Florida Third District.

Feb. 12, 1991.

Rehearing Denied March 21, 1991.

Weil, Lucio, Mandler & Croland, and Ronald P. Weil and Alan P. Dagen, Miami, for appellant.

Steel Hector & Davis, and Frank Scruggs, Cecilia F. Renn and Jonathan Sjostrom, Miami, for appellees.

Before SCHWARTZ, C.J., and COPE and LEVY, JJ.

COPE, Judge.

Metropolitan Investment Corporation appeals a non-final order denying its motion to dissolve a temporary injunction. We affirm.

Appellees David Buchler and Ian Phillips, English chartered accountants, were jointly appointed receivers of Havelet Leasing, Ltd., by England's High Court of Justice. Subsequently, they were designated administrators of Havelet under the English Insolvency Act of 1986. The latter appointment carried with it expanded powers under the Act.

Havelet has a wholly owned subsidiary, Eskdale, Inc., a Delaware corporation. Eskdale is also a party to the English insolvency proceedings. Eskdale owns a jetliner which it holds for Havelet's benefit under a declaration of trust. Eskdale leased the airliner to Metropolitan, which in turn subleased the airliner to Lineas Aereas Costaricenses, S.A. ("LACSA"), the Costa Rican airline. Under the terms of the transaction, monthly lease payments were to be paid by LACSA to Metropolitan, which would deduct its commission and forward the balance to Eskdale.

During the English insolvency proceedings, Eskdale gave an undertaking to the court that it would direct Metropolitan to forward the lease payments directly to the administrators, rather than to Eskdale. Metropolitan refused to comply and simply held LACSA's lease payments in a Miami bank account without forwarding the net amounts either to Eskdale or the administrators.

The administrators brought an action for declaratory and injunctive relief, joining Metropolitan as a defendant along with International Bank of Miami, which held the LACSA payments. International Bank is a stakeholder in this litigation.

After notice, the trial court entered a temporary injunction directing Metropolitan and the bank to forward the LACSA payments (less commission) to the administrators. Thereafter, Metropolitan moved to dissolve the temporary injunction. The trial court denied the motion and Metropolitan has appealed.

Metropolitan first contends that the trial court should not have extended comity to the English receivership and administratorship orders. To the contrary, the courts of this jurisdiction may extend comity to foreign receivership and insolvency proceedings. See Belle Island Investment Co., Ltd. v. Feingold, 453 So.2d 1143 (Fla. 3d DCA), cause dismissed, 459 So.2d 1039 (Fla.1984); see also Cardenas v. Solis, 570 So.2d 996 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990).

Metropolitan next contends that the proceeding below violates the due process clauses of the Florida and United States Constitutions because the English court failed to join Metropolitan in the English...