TRIAL COURT PROPERLY GRANTS DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS FOR LACK OF PERSONAL JURISDICTION AND FORUM NON CONVENIENS, WHERE THE PLAINTIFF FAILED TO SUPPLY AN AFFIDAVIT OR SWORN PROOF TO THE CONTRARY
Unified Medical v. Progressive, 49 Fla. L. Weekly D189 (Fla. 3rd DCA Jan. 17, 2024):
The defendant filed a limited appearance, a motion to quash service and a motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction and forum non conveniens. It asserted that it was both incorporated in Ohio, and a resident of Ohio, and did not conduct any business in Florida.
The plaintiff responded that the alter ego theory gave it jurisdiction over the defendant, because the defendant was controlled by Progressive Corporation or Progressive Group, both which did business in Florida. Plaintiffs attached three website pages which did not refute or rebut the jurisdictional arguments, and Progressive Preferred had filed a sworn declaration.
While the plaintiff made its initial pleading burden by asserting a basis for personal jurisdiction under the long arm statute, section 48.193(1)(a)(1), when the defendant provided the declaration of its witness attesting it was incorporated and resided out of state, the plaintiff was then required to file something to substantiate its jurisdictional allegations.
Because the plaintiff failed to provide an affidavit or any sworn proof to meet its burden, it acted at its own peril, and the trial court correctly found that the dismissal was proper based on the defendant’s proof.