Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

276 F.2d 906

Docket No. 17923.

Howland v. Bevis

Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals

Decided April 18, 1960.

Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals · decided 1960-04-18

Cited by 2 later decisions — most recently September 1969

1 federal appellate · 1 state decisions

2 counsel of record

Key passage — most relied on by later courts

““ * * * This personal injury suit was brought against a non-resident of Florida. Service was effected under the provisions of Sections 47.29 and 47.30 of the Florida Statutes (1953), F.S.A. This law permits service on the Secretary of State as to a non-resident who is charged with negligent injury in an automobile accident in Florida either while non-resident or after changing a Florida residence at time of injury to non-residence at time of suit and service. It was thus sufficient, for the purpose of charging jurisdiction in the District and in Florida, to allege that at the time of the suit the defendant was a resident of Texas and that the injury had occurred in Florida. It was not necessary to allege that the defendant was either a resident or a nonresident of Florida at the time of the injury. The statutes were applicable in either event. * * * ””

quoted by 1 later decision, including 226 So. 2d 351 - Penn v. Ashley

Relies on Revell v. J. G. Anderson Realty Company · Red Top Cab & Baggage Co. v. Holt

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Opinion by (per_curiam) · Decided 1960-04-18

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1*907C. R. McDonald, Jr., Otis R. Parker, Jr., Fort Pierce, Fla., Fee, Parker & Sample, Fort Pierce, Fla., for appellant.

¶2Noah Walker, Cornelius T. Walker, Yero Beach, Fla., for appellee.

¶3Before TUTTLE, JONES and BROWN, Circuit Judges.

¶4PER CURIAM.

¶5The judgment is affirmed. This personal injury suit was brought against a non-resident of Florida. Service was effected under the provisions of Sections 47.29 and 47.30 of the Florida Statutes (1953), F.S.A. This law permits service on the Secretary of State as to a non-resident who is charged with negligent injury in an automobile accident in Florida either while non-resident or after changing a Florida residence at time of injury to non-residence at time of suit and service. It was thus sufficient, for the purpose of charging jurisdiction in the District and in Florida, to allege that at the time of the suit the defendant was a resident of Texas and that the injury had occurred in Florida. It was not necessary to allege that the defendant was either a resident or a non-resident of Florida at the time of the injury. The statutes were applicable in either event. The case of Red Top Cab & Baggage Co. for Use and Benefit of Fountaine v. Holt, 154 Fla. 77, 16 So.2d 649 is inapplicable because it construed an earlier statute which by its terms applied only to persons who were non-residents at the time of the injury.

¶6The only remaining contentions were as to the facts. There was sufficient evidence to warrant submission of these issues to the jury. We find no other error. The judgment is affirmed.

/276/f2d/906 · .json · Public domain