Griffith v. Toscano

Summary

This Report and Recommendation addresses Defendant Patricia Toscano’s motion to dismiss in a diversity action brought by Michael Griffith concerning an alleged oral agreement to divide proceeds from the sale of Florida real property. The court recommends dismissal without prejudice for lack of personal jurisdiction, concluding that the complaint does not establish a basis for jurisdiction under Florida’s long-arm statute. The document also discusses service of process in Ireland and the sufficiency of the conversion claim.

Holdings

1. The complaint failed to allege sufficient material facts supporting specific personal jurisdiction under any asserted provision of Florida's long-arm statute. Conclusory assertions that the contract was breached and the tort occurred in Miami-Dade County were insufficient.
2. The exercise of personal jurisdiction would not satisfy due process because Defendant lacked sufficient purposeful contacts with Florida relating to Plaintiff's claims.
3. Plaintiff failed to establish valid service of process under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(f), the Hague Convention, and applicable Irish requirements.
4. The conversion count failed to state a claim because it sought recovery of money allegedly owed under a contract without alleging that the money was specific and identifiable or that Defendant had an independent duty to preserve or deliver it.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the complaint alleged sufficient facts to establish specific personal jurisdiction over Defendant under Florida's long-arm statute.
2. Whether exercising personal jurisdiction over Defendant would satisfy the Due Process Clause.
3. Whether Plaintiff established valid service of process in Ireland under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(f) and the Hague Convention.
4. Whether Plaintiff stated a Florida conversion claim based on Defendant's alleged failure to pay money owed under a contract.
5. Whether Plaintiff sought leave to amend the complaint.

Disposition

other