Tueta v. Rodriguez, 5370

• Decision Date: 11 June 1965
• Docket Number: No. 5370,5370
• Citation: 176 So.2d 550
• Court: Florida District Court of Appeals
• Parties: Victor TUETA and the Marine Bank & Trust Co. of Tampa, Appellants, v. Santiago RODRIGUEZ, Appellee.

Page 550

176 So.2d 550

Victor TUETA and the Marine Bank & Trust Co. of Tampa, Appellants, v. Santiago RODRIGUEZ, Appellee.

No. 5370.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

June 11, 1965.

Rehearing Denied July 15, 1965.

Robert T. Mann of Campbell, Mann & Hampton, Tampa, for appellant tueta.

Ralph C. Dell of Allen, Dell, Frank & Trinkle, Tampa, for appellant Marine Bank.

Norman S. Brown of Brown & Brown, Tampa, for appellee.

SMITH, Chief Judge.

This interlocutory appeal is from orders of the circuit court denying appellant-Tueta's motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction and appellant-Marine Bank's motion to dissolve an injunction against honoring drafts issued under an irrevocable letter of credit of which appellant-Tueta was the beneficiary. The appellants will be referred to as the 'Tampa Bank,' and 'Tueta' and the appellee as 'Rodriguez.'

Rodriguez, a resident of Tampa, and Tueta, a resident of Lausanne, Switzerland, were involved in certain international commercial dealings. Rodriguez arranged for the Tampa Bank to issue an irrevocable letter of credit for $13,500 with Tueta as beneficiary thereof. The letter instructed that if the conditions set out therein were complied with a foreign bank on receipt of Tueta's sight draft could pay up to $13,550 and that the same would be honored by due presentment to the Tampa Bank. Rodriguez placed $13,550 in the Tampa Bank and the letter of credit was sent to Tueta in Switzerland. Just prior to the letter's expiration date and under circumstances within its terms a Swiss bank accepted Tueta's draft and paid $13,550 thereon. Prior to the time the Swiss bank made timely presentation to the Tampa Bank Rodriguez succeeded in getting a court order enjoining the Tampa Bank from paying out any of the $13,550 and a writ of garnishment thereon was issued. The Tampa Bank was served personally and Tueta was served by publication pursuant to Chapter 48, Fla.Stat. F.S.A. on the theory the $13,550 represented an amount owed by the bank to Tueta and was a res, thus giving the court jurisdiction to proceed quasi in rem.

The injunction is based on an alleged breach by Tueta of the underlying contract between him and Ordriguez which gave rise to the issuance of the letter of credit. For purposes of this appeal we need not delve into either the terms of this contract nor the circumstances surrounding its alleged breach. The only question presented to us is whether or not the court had jurisdiction of a res by virtue of which it could proceed quasi in rem without personal jurisdiction of Tueta and absent presence of the letter itself within the court's jurisdiction.

Appellee maintains that the relationship between Tueta and the Tampa Bank is that of creditor and debtor; that Florida Statute 62.22, F.S.A. authorizes garnishment or attachment of debts owing to a non-resident upon service of process as authorized by law and that Tueta was properly served by publication under Chapter 48, Florida Statutes, F.S.A., and thus the court has quasi in rem jurisdiction.

Appellants contend that the letter of credit is in the nature of a negotiable instrument upon which the Tampa Bank is strictly liable without regard to any dispute between Tueta...