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.

Kin Yong Lung Industrial Co. v. Temple

Citations: 816 So. 2d 663; 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 2883Docket: No. 2D01-1160

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida; March 7, 2002; Florida; State Appellate Court

Narrative Opinion Summary

In this case, Kin Yong Lung Industrial Company, Limited (KYL) appeals a nonfinal order denying its motion to quash service of process due to a lack of personal jurisdiction in Florida. The case arises from a product liability and negligence action filed by the personal representative of an estate, alleging that a defective helmet manufactured by KYL caused a fatal accident. KYL contended that it lacked business operations or sufficient contacts in Florida, supported by an affidavit. The trial court denied KYL's motion without explanation, prompting an appeal. The appellate court reversed the decision, agreeing that the plaintiff failed to establish KYL's minimum contacts with Florida necessary to satisfy due process. Although the plaintiff demonstrated a jurisdictional basis under Florida's long-arm statute, the evidence did not show that KYL had purposeful availment or direct actions targeting Florida. The court highlighted that mere foreseeability of product use in Florida does not satisfy the minimum contacts requirement. As a result, the appellate court found personal jurisdiction over KYL unattainable, reversing the trial court's order. Judges Fulmer and Casanueva concurred in this conclusion.

Legal Issues Addressed

Burden of Proof in Jurisdictional Challenges

Application: The burden shifts to the plaintiff to counter the defendant's affidavit showing the absence of necessary contacts with the forum state.

Reasoning: The burden then shifts to the plaintiff to counter the defendant's affidavit. If the affidavits can be reconciled, the trial court may resolve the issue based on undisputed facts; otherwise, a limited evidentiary hearing is required if there is a conflict.

Minimum Contacts Requirement for Personal Jurisdiction

Application: The court emphasizes that the plaintiff must demonstrate that the defendant has the requisite minimum contacts with the forum state to satisfy due process.

Reasoning: The court agrees, stating that once a plaintiff establishes a jurisdictional basis, any challenge by the defendant must be accompanied by a legally sufficient affidavit.

Personal Jurisdiction and Long-Arm Statute

Application: The court evaluates whether the plaintiff established a jurisdictional basis under Florida's long-arm statute, specifically for product liability claims.

Reasoning: KYL acknowledges the existence of sufficient jurisdictional facts to invoke Florida's long-arm statute, specifically section 48.193(1)(f)2 related to product liability claims.

Purposeful Availment and Foreseeability

Application: The court concludes that mere foreseeability of a product's use in a state or indirect economic benefits do not constitute minimum contacts.

Reasoning: The court emphasizes that mere foreseeability of product use in a state or indirect economic benefits do not constitute minimum contacts.