You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.

Laser Electrical Contractors, Inc. v. CES Indus., Inc.

Citation: 573 So. 2d 1081Docket: 90-1094

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida; February 12, 1991; Florida; State Appellate Court

Narrative Opinion Summary

In the case concerning C.E.S. Industries, Inc. and the appellants, Laser Electrical Contractors, Inc. and its guarantor, Stanley Gentzler, the primary legal issue involved the assertion of personal jurisdiction under Florida's Long-Arm Statute. C.E.S. initiated a lawsuit in Florida after Laser defaulted on payments under a contract, with Gentzler serving as guarantor. Both appellants were served in Texas and subsequently filed a motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction, which the lower court denied. On appeal, the court affirmed the denial of Laser's motion, noting that C.E.S.'s evidence, including credit applications and payment records, substantiated the breach of contract in Florida, thereby meeting the statute's jurisdictional requirements. However, the court reversed the decision concerning Gentzler, determining that the allegations failed to establish personal jurisdiction over him as a guarantor since the complaint did not fulfill the criteria set by section 48.193(1)(d). This led to a partial affirmation and partial reversal of the interlocutory order. All judges concurred with the decision.

Legal Issues Addressed

Affidavit Requirement to Contest Jurisdiction

Application: The appellants failed to provide affidavits to contest personal jurisdiction, which is necessary to raise issues of minimum contacts.

Reasoning: The court noted that the appellants did not support their motion to dismiss with affidavits, which is necessary to contest jurisdiction or assert minimum contacts.

Jurisdiction over Guarantors

Application: The court reversed the denial of Gentzler's motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction, as the complaint did not sufficiently establish jurisdiction over him as a guarantor.

Reasoning: The court reversed the denial of the motion to dismiss regarding Gentzler, finding that the allegations did not adequately demonstrate personal jurisdiction over him, as he was merely a guarantor in the contract with Laser.

Personal Jurisdiction under the Long-Arm Statute

Application: The court upheld personal jurisdiction over Laser Electrical Contractors, Inc. based on the Long-Arm Statute, as evidence showed Laser breached a contract in Florida by failing to make payments.

Reasoning: Evidence presented in C.E.S.'s complaint, including a credit application and payment statements, indicated that a contract existed and that Laser had not fulfilled its payment obligations, thus satisfying the requirements of the Long-Arm Statute.