18 Cited authorities

Posner v. Essex Insurance
178 F.3d 1209 (11th Cir. 1999) Cited 797 times
Holding that the plaintiff “alleged facts, unrebutted by Salem, that established a prima facie case of jurisdiction over Salem”
Madara v. Hall
916 F.2d 1510 (11th Cir. 1990) Cited 735 times 3 Legal Analyses
Holding that even when a defendant submits evidence supporting his jurisdictional position, we still "accept the facts alleged in the complaint as true, to the extent they are uncontroverted by the defendant's affidavits"
Licciardello v. Lovelady
544 F.3d 1280 (11th Cir. 2008) Cited 371 times
Holding that the plaintiff’s trademark infringement allegations "satisf[ied] the Calder effects test for personal jurisdiction—the commission of an intentional tort, expressly aimed at a specific individual in the forum whose effects were suffered in the forum"
Sculptchair, Inc. v. Century Arts, Ltd.
94 F.3d 623 (11th Cir. 1996) Cited 523 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding that making phone calls from Canada to Florida did not qualify as carrying on a business venture in Florida
Robinson v. Giarmarco Bill, P.C
74 F.3d 253 (11th Cir. 1996) Cited 526 times
Holding that the long-arm statute extends jurisdiction over a defendant who allegedly caused injury in Florida by negligently drafting and reviewing a will outside of Florida
Future Technology Today, Inc. v. OSF Healthcare Systems
218 F.3d 1247 (11th Cir. 2000) Cited 371 times
Holding that defendant's failure to pay plaintiff an amount due under contract satisfies Florida's long-arm statute
Horizon Aggressive Growth v. Rothstein-Kass
421 F.3d 1162 (11th Cir. 2005) Cited 214 times
Holding that relevant factors for deciding whether a business was being carried on include the presence and operation of an office in Florida, possessing a license to do business in Florida, the number of Florida clients, and the percentage of revenue gleaned from Florida clients
Internet Solutions Corp. v. Marshall
557 F.3d 1293 (11th Cir. 2009) Cited 127 times
Noting that the defendant must "raise, through affidavits, documents or testimony, a meritorious challenge to personal jurisdiction"
New Lenox Industries, Inc. v. Fenton
510 F. Supp. 2d 893 (M.D. Fla. 2007) Cited 68 times
Holding that a FUTSA claim was not barred by the economic loss rule, even though the claim was indistinguishable from a breach of contract claim, because under Florida law, the economic loss rule does not bar statutory causes of action
Polskie Linie Oceaniczne v. Seasafe Transport
795 F.2d 968 (11th Cir. 1986) Cited 122 times
Noting that, if the defendant makes a showing of the inapplicability of the long-arm statute, "the plaintiff is required to substantiate the jurisdictional allegations in the complaint by affidavits or other competent proof, and not merely reiterate the factual allegations in the complaint"
Section 48.193 - Acts subjecting person to jurisdiction of courts of state
Fla. Stat. § 48.193 Cited 1,678 times 15 Legal Analyses
Referencing Fla. Stat. § 685.102

Canadian Steel, Inc. v. HFP Capital Markets, LLC et al

18 Cited authorities

Holding that the plaintiff “alleged facts, unrebutted by Salem, that established a prima facie case of jurisdiction over Salem”

Holding that even when a defendant submits evidence supporting his jurisdictional position, we still "accept the facts alleged in the complaint as true, to the extent they are uncontroverted by the defendant's affidavits"

Holding that the plaintiff’s trademark infringement allegations "satisf[ied] the Calder effects test for personal jurisdiction—the commission of an intentional tort, expressly aimed at a specific individual in the forum whose effects were suffered in the forum"

Holding that making phone calls from Canada to Florida did not qualify as carrying on a business venture in Florida

Holding that the long-arm statute extends jurisdiction over a defendant who allegedly caused injury in Florida by negligently drafting and reviewing a will outside of Florida

Holding that defendant's failure to pay plaintiff an amount due under contract satisfies Florida's long-arm statute

Holding that relevant factors for deciding whether a business was being carried on include the presence and operation of an office in Florida, possessing a license to do business in Florida, the number of Florida clients, and the percentage of revenue gleaned from Florida clients

Noting that the defendant must "raise, through affidavits, documents or testimony, a meritorious challenge to personal jurisdiction"

Holding that a FUTSA claim was not barred by the economic loss rule, even though the claim was indistinguishable from a breach of contract claim, because under Florida law, the economic loss rule does not bar statutory causes of action

Noting that, if the defendant makes a showing of the inapplicability of the long-arm statute, "the plaintiff is required to substantiate the jurisdictional allegations in the complaint by affidavits or other competent proof, and not merely reiterate the factual allegations in the complaint"

Referencing Fla. Stat. § 685.102