Whittington v. Laney, 89-2397

Decision Date13 September 1990
Docket NumberNo. 89-2397,89-2397
Citation566 So.2d 599
Parties15 Fla. L. Weekly D2314 L.E. WHITTINGTON, etc., Appellant, v. James Scott LANEY, Appellee.
CourtFlorida District Court of Appeals

J. David Walsh of Cameron Marriott, Walsh and Hodges, P.A., Daytona Beach, for appellant.

Brian R. Toung of Rice, Rose & Toung, Daytona Beach, for appellee.

PETERSON, Judge.

L.E. Whittington appeals the denial of his motion to dismiss for improper venue. We affirm.

James Scott Laney filed a complaint in Volusia County against Whittington. The complaint alleged that he purchased from Whittington a boat engine that was warranted to be free of defects for a reasonable period of time, that the engine failed and was repaired, that it failed a second time, and that finally Whittington provided a second replacement engine with a 90-day express warranty. The second engine allegedly also failed, and in his complaint Laney alleged breach of the 90-day express warranty, among other breaches.

Whittington countered with the motion to dismiss which alleged lack of venue and other defenses. The motion was supported by an affidavit wherein Whittington stated he is a resident of and operates his business in Palm Beach County and that he does not maintain a place of business in Volusia County. He also stated without elaboration that "all of the transactions related to purchase of the engine as alleged took place in Palm Beach County." Laney responded with an affidavit that specifically alleged that the second engine was brought to Volusia County by Whittington personally. It also alleged without elaboration that "all incidents giving rise to this action occurred in Volusia County."

The trial judge was faced with contradictory affidavits that generally alleged all of the transactions or incidents occurred in Palm Beach County per Whittington and in Volusia County per Laney. The burden is on the defendant to show that the venue selected by the plaintiff is improper, Inverness Coca-Cola Bottling Co. v. McDaniel, 78 So.2d 100 (Fla.1955), and Whittington failed to meet that burden. Furthermore, it was unrefuted that the defendant personally delivered to Volusia County the second engine that was warranted for 90 days. A cause of action for breach of warranty accrues where the goods are delivered.

AFFIRMED.

COBB and GOSHORN, JJ., concur.

To continue reading

Request your trial
4 cases
  • Masonite Corp. Hardboard Siding Prods. Litigation
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Louisiana
    • September 16, 1998
    ...that place of accrual of damage, not place of manufacture, determines governing law for warranty claim); Whittington v. Laney, 566 So.2d 599, 599 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.1990) (holding that action for breach of warranty accrues where goods are On balance, these factors weigh in favor of applying F......
  • Sundor Brands, Inc. v. Groves Co., Inc.
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • September 4, 1992
    ...300 So.2d 712 (Fla. 2d DCA 1974); Richard Bertram & Co. v. Barrett, 155 So.2d 409 (Fla. 1st DCA 1963). See also Whittington v. Laney, 566 So.2d 599 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990). Defendants similarly contend that a cause of action for breach of a guarantee accrues where the guarantee was made. Lamar ......
  • Ashemimry v. Ba Nafa, No. 5D00-24
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • February 23, 2001
    ...the trial court was presented with almost overwhelming evidence that the hotel was located in Orange County. See Whittington v. Laney, 566 So.2d 599 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990)(defendant failed to meet burden of showing that venue selected by plaintiff was improper where judge was faced with contra......
  • Forms and Surfaces, Inc. v. Welbro Constructors, Inc.
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • December 3, 1993
    ...such a breach accrues, for venue purposes, where the allegedly defective or nonconforming goods were delivered. 3 Whittington v. Laney, 566 So.2d 599 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990); Stanfield v. DeStefano, 300 So.2d 712 (Fla. 2d DCA 1974); Richard Bertram & Co. v. Barrett, 155 So.2d 409 (Fla. 1st DCA ......
1 books & journal articles
  • The Kansas Venue Statute Where Does a Cause of Action Arise
    • United States
    • Kansas Bar Association KBA Bar Journal No. 64-09, September 1995
    • Invalid date
    ...[FN42]. E.g., Guyan Motors, Inc. v. Williams, 133 W.Va. 630, 57 S.E.2d 529 (1950). [FN43]. E.g., Whittington v. Laney, 566 So.2d 599, 15 FLW 2314 (1990). [FN44]. 111 Mont 539, 111 P2d 286, 133 ALR 1115 (1941). [FN45]. 692 P2d 956, 53 ALR4th 1097 (Alaska 1984). [FN46]. 484 So.2d 1370, 11 FLW......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT