Royal Industries, Inc. v. Birdsong, CC--442
Decision Date | 15 December 1976 |
Docket Number | No. CC--442,CC--442 |
Citation | 340 So.2d 526 |
Parties | ROYAL INDUSTRIES, INC., and Buck Equipment Corp., Appellants, v. John BIRDSONG, et al., Appellees. |
Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Sutton G. Hilyard, Jr., of Pitts, Eubanks, Ross & Rumberger, Orlando, for appellant.
C. Anthony Schoder, Jr., of Hoffman, Hendry, Parker & Smith; and David R. Miller, of Smalbein, Eubank, Johnson, Rosier & Bussey, Daytona Beach, for appellees.
This is an interlocutory appeal from an order denying motions of appellants, Royal Industries and Buck Equipment Corporation, to quash service of process, and denying Royal's motion to quash service of cross-claim of appellee, Desa Industries, Inc., against Royal.
Appellees John Birdsong and wife filed a complaint against foreign corporations Buck, Royal, and Desa for personal injuries. Following service of process, (or attempted service of process) on Royal, Buck, and Desa, Desa filed an answer and cross-claim against Royal. On March 4, 1975, a 'notice of appearance' was filed by attorneys for Buck and Royal. Subsequently, on March 30, 1976, Buck and Royal filed the aforesaid motions to quash service of process contending that the service was defective and the court did not have personal jurisdiction over them.
The initial question is whether or not the appearance filed on March 4 was a general appearance which subjected Royal and Buck to the jurisdiction of the court and precluded a later contest as to the validity of the process or service thereof. Appellants contend that in 1952 when the Supreme Court adopted Rule of Civil Procedure 1.11(b) ( ) the distinctions between general and special appearances were abolished. Present Rule 1.140(b) which in pertinent part is in material respects the same as old rule 1.11(b), provides as follows:
It is clear that prior to the adoption of the aforesaid Rule of Civil Procedure, an appearance which did not attack jurisdiction constituted a general appearance submitting the party filing same to the jurisdiction of the court. The Supreme Court in Sternberg v. Sternberg, 139 Fla. 219, 190 So. 486 (1939), stated as follows:
While Rule of Civil Procedure 1.140 now allows a defendant to attack the jurisdiction of the court either in his responsive pleading or by motion and therefore no longer requires that he make a special appearance for such purpose, it does not follow that a defendant may now make a general appearance and later repudiate it by attacking the court's jurisdiction over him. Appellants find comfort in two opinions of the District Court of Appeal, Third District, which through not in point with the case sub judice, contain statements that the intent of the aforesaid Rule of Civil...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Gelkop v. Gelkop
...endeavor was not a member of the Florida Bar. Cf. Rorick v. Stilwell, 101 Fla. 4, 133 So. 609, 615 (1931); Royal Industries, Inc. v. Birdsong, 340 So.2d 526 (Fla. 1st DCA 1976). This conclusion is supported by analogous cases in other jurisdictions. Graves v. Nutting Truck & Caster Co., 76 ......
-
Weatherhead Co. v. Coletti, 80-1217
...Viator v. Morgan Construction Co., 344 So.2d 657 (Fla. 1st DCA 1977), cert. denied, 352 So.2d 173 (Fla.1977); Royal Industries, Inc. v. Birdsong, 340 So.2d 526 (Fla. 1st DCA 1976), cert. denied, 351 So.2d 408 ; see also, White v. Nicholson, 386 So.2d 74 (Fla. 2d DCA 1980). We accordingly ho......
-
Coto-Ojeda v. Samuel, COTO-OJED
...See Hubbard v. Cazares, 413 So.2d 1192, 1193 (Fla. 2d DCA 1981), review denied, 417 So.2d 329 (Fla.1982); Royal Indus., Inc. v. Birdsong, 340 So.2d 526, 528 (Fla. 1st DCA 1976), cert. denied, 351 So.2d 408 (Fla.1977), overruled on other grounds, Public Gas Co. v. Weatherhead Co., 409 So.2d ......
-
Biogen Distributors, Inc. v. Tanner
...court's jurisdiction. Consolidated Aluminum Corp. v. Weinroth, 422 So.2d 330, 331 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.1982); Royal Indus., Inc. v. Birdsong, 340 So.2d 526, 528 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.1976). No matter how unfortunate, Mr. Tanner must bear the consequences of his ill-considered, and apparently uncouns......