Document Type

Article

Publication Date

2009

Abstract

Internet advertising leads to client relationships that transcend state and national borders. Modern professionals secure new clients through Internet advertising and communicate with clients remotely through e-mail. Particularly in Florida, a premier retirement destination, many retirees who built careers and nest eggs in other states receive advice from nonresident professionals.

This Article concerns the range of malpractice-related claims that disgruntled clients bring against nonresident professionals, including breach of fiduciary duty and professional negligence. Further, the Article contemplates issues surrounding personal jurisdiction in such cases. Often, nonresident professionals find themselves sued in Florida even when they have no office or agent in Florida and never met with the plaintiff in Florida. Therefore, personal jurisdiction challenges commonly present the first obstacle that Florida plaintiffs must overcome after they file malpractice-related claims against foreign professionals.

Personal jurisdiction analysis involves a two-step inquiry. First, Florida's long-arm statute must provide a basis for personal jurisdiction. Second, sufficient minimum contacts between Florida and the nonresident defendant must satisfy constitutional due process so maintenance of the suit in Florida "does not offend traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice." Both the statutory and constitutional steps of personal jurisdictional analysis distinguish between specific and general jurisdiction. Specific jurisdiction concerns the nonresident defendant's contacts with Florida as they relate to the cause of action and provides jurisdiction for any cause of action arising from those contacts. General jurisdiction is based on an out-of-state defendant's activity in Florida regardless of whether the cause of action arises from the Florida activity.

Download

Share

COinS