Florida Court Clarifies Personal Jurisdiction Over Non-Residents

In Pianezza v. Mia Collection Servs.. LLC, 2024 Fla. App. LEXIS 1784 (Fla. 3d DCA March 6, 2024), an action against non-resident principal and employee of foreign limited liability company alleging claims of fraud in the inducement, negligent misrepresentation, breach of express warranty, and conspiracy stemming from LLC's provision of counterfeit merchandise was not dismissed for lack of personal jurisdiction and the defendants appealed. The appellate court found that the corporate shield doctrine did not protect defendants from the trial court's exercise of personal jurisdiction where the complaint sufficiently alleged that defendants committed a tortious act within Florida by directing telephonic and electronic communications into Florida in which they allegedly fraudulently misrepresented the authenticity of merchandise sold to the plaintiff. The appellate court explained that the corporate shield doctrine will not operate to bar personal jurisdiction in Florida over an individual defendant that commits a tortious act in Florida, regardless of whether it was on behalf of a corporate employer.

The appellate court also found that defendants' affidavits were insufficient to shift the burden back to the plaintiff to demonstrate why jurisdiction was proper where, although both defendants denied in their declarations that they directed a phone call, text message, or e-mail to anyone in the state of Florida, they qualified these statements by stating they never did so on their own behalf . The qualification by these defendants failed to negate the allegation that they committed tortious acts in Florida by sending and/or directing telephonic and electronic communications into Florida. This, the court explained, leaves open the inference that they did direct phone calls, text messages, and/or emails into Florida in their capacity as employees of the LLC. The appellate court also found that principal's declaration as a corporate representative on behalf of LLC contained nothing more than legal conclusions, which plaintiff was not required to refute.

The appellate court therefore found that the trial court properly concluded that sufficient minimum contacts existed because defendants knew plaintiff was located in Florida and, therefore, knew their alleged misrepresentations would impact a Florida resident and would cause injuries in Florida. Thus, these non-resident defendants are required to defend the case brought against them in Florida.

If you are interested in receiving a copy of this decision or wish to learn more about the impact of this decision, please feel free to reach out to us at admin@miamimaritimelaw.co or blog@miamimaritimelaw.co.

Rogue Insurance Adjusters in MIA Scammed Their Employer

If you have ever handled an auto insurance claim, made an insurance claim or worked for an auto insurance claims department, a call-in of a new claim is routine--in this instance, a Lexus GS350 was reportedly involved in a fender bender with a Chrysler 320 in North Miami-Dade. Within days, adjusters from a team that covers the area, reported inspecting the Lexus and authorizing a series of payments totaling over $16,000.

But according to the Miami Herald, the accident never actually happened. In fact, the exact same Lexus had been used to file at least 10 claims for phantom crashes, all signed off on by the same adjusters. The body shop that reaped most of the payouts for these claims is not real — according to Miami-Dade prosecutors, one of the companies that lists its address is, in actuality, a vacant lot in Little Haiti.

The fake crash report in September 2016 was but one of dozens of sham claims that cost GEICO more than half a million dollars and led to a series of arrests. Among those arrested: two GEICO insurance adjusters, Juan Carlos Diaz and Cesar Santiago Tapanes, who prosecutors allege got cash kickbacks for helping defraud their own company; Sepp Lewis Tevini, a mechanic who arranged the bogus claims on cars he was supposed to be servicing; and Estevenson "Skull" Dorval, who represented two auto body shops that did not exist.

It is reported that 14 people were charged in the investigation conducted by Florida's Bureau of Insurance Fraud and the State Attorney's Office. The others charged are believed to have allowed their policies to be used, or made phone calls to GEICO while impersonating crash victims. The group faces charges including grand theft, insurance fraud and racketeering. In all, at least 45 bogus claims were made, most of them on high-end cars. Some luxury car owners had no idea that their policies were being abused, primarily by their local repairers that had access to their insurance information.

This case is a warning to policyholders--check your invoices from your insurers. If your policy has increased in cost but you have not had any accidents or claims, ask why. You may be surprised by the answer.

If you wish to reach me, you may do so at blog@miamimaritimelaw.co.