Just another WordPress site

Category: Business Law

  • Broward Residential Evictions Restart June 3, 2020 (Extended to August 1, 2020)

    Update: June 30, 2020 at 8:10 p.m. Governor Desantis issued executive order (20-159) extending Executive Order 20-94 (as extended by Executive Order 20- 121) until 12:01 a.m. on August 1, 2020. We are still experiencing issues with the clerk’s office refusing to issue writs and some judicial divisions not signing orders for obtaining judgments and writs on non-residential evictions and those not involving non-payment issues.

    Update: June 1, 2020 at 7:06 p.m. Governor Desantis issued an executive order (20-137) extending Executive Order 20-94 (as extended by Executive Order 20- 121) until 12:01 a.m. on July 1, 2020. This extension applies to residential properties for non-payment of rent. The Federal Cares Act legislation also remains in effect. Commercial Evictions and residential evictions that are not based on a termination for non-payment of rent are not affected by the Governor’s extension.

    On May 28, 2020, the 17th Judicial Circuit’s Chief Judge, Hon. Jack Tutor, issued Amended Administrative Order (AO) 2020-39-CO / 2020-40-Civ (Defaults, Writs of Garnishment, and Evictions and Writs of Possession).  The order reopens residential eviction proceedings in Broward County.

    Effective June 3, 2020, the Clerk of the Court will begin processing defaults and issuing writs of possession as permitted by law. The AO further suspends the Rule 1.580(a) “forthwith” requirement, meaning clerks are not required to expedite the issuance of said writs. The AO adds a new requirement that residential landlords must file a verification of compliance with the Cares Act which is still in effect until July 25, 2020 (120 days from March 27, 2020). Please refer to our prior blog article (click here) for more information about the specifics of the Cares Act.

    The verification of compliance with the Cares Act requires that the Plaintiff sign a verified statement as to the following facts:

    • The Plaintiff is not a multifamily borrower currently receiving a forbearance under the Cares Act for the property which is the subject of the eviction.
    • The eviction is for a reason other than nonpayment of rent
    • The action involves a commercial property, or does not involve a rental property that participates in federal assistance programs, and is not encumbered by a federally backed mortgage loan.

    The verified statement is in the nature of an affidavit, although does not require notarization. It contains an acknowledgment that “any material misrepresentation could cause … prosecution of a separate criminal law violation” and shall be signed under penalty of perjury. The verification cannot be signed by the filing attorney or property manager, it must be signed by an owner or an officer of the owning entity.

    For the entire text of the order please follow this link (2020-39-CO_2020-40-Civ_amended). The full AO contains a written definition of “covered dwelling” and the form of the verified statement that must be filed. The provisions of this AO apply to any residential eviction case based on non-payment filed on or after March 27, 2020, and shall automatically expire on July 28, 2020, unless amended or extended.

    The purpose of this article is to provide you a summary of the most up-to-date information available concerning developments concerning landlords in the State of Florida and more specifically, in Broward County. The author will attempt to keep this article up to date with additional information as it becomes available, but as the current state of affairs is a constantly evolving and fluid situation, you should refer to the sources cited herein for specific information. This is not intended to be a substitute for proper legal advice based on your specific facts and circumstances.

    A portion of our practice at Pompano Law is the representation of commercial and residential property owners. If you are a property owner in need of legal counsel, please feel free to reach out to us.

     

  • Eviction Orders: Florida’s Local, State and Federal Moratoriums

    Updated: May 29, 2020. This information has been superseded by a recent Administrative Order. Please click here to see our latest blog article with updated information, including the latest Administrative Order restarting residential evictions in Broward County.

    Updated: May 15, 2020 at 7:00 pm.

    On March 27, 2020, President Donald Trump signed the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act (“CARES Act”) into law. The law includes a federal eviction moratorium for residential tenants living in certain types of housing as summarized below.

    Under the provisions of the new law, residential landlords are restricted from filing new evictions for non-payment of rent, and prohibits “charg[ing] fees, penalties, or other charges to the tenant related to such nonpayment of rent.” §4024(b).

    The Act does not affect cases:

    1. that were filed before the moratorium took effect or that are filed after it sunsets
    2. that involve non-covered tenancies (see below), or
    3. where the eviction is based on another reason besides nonpayment of rent or nonpayment of other fees or charges.

    What types of housing are covered by the federal eviction moratorium?

    The eviction moratorium applies to “covered dwellings,” which includes those dwellings on or in “covered properties.” Section 4024(a) of the Act defines a “covered property” as a property that:

    1. participates in a “covered housing program”
    2. participates in the “rural housing voucher program;
    3. has a federally backed mortgage loan; or
    4. has a federally backed multifamily mortgage loan.

    The Act defines a federally backed mortgage loan as that which is “in whole or in part, or insured, guaranteed, supplemented, or assisted in any way, by any officer or agency of the Federal Government or under or in connection with a housing or urban development program administered by the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development or a housing or related program administered by any other such officer or agency, or is purchased or securitized by the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation or the Federal National Mortgage Association.” The National Housing Law Project, reports that about 70 percent of mortgages for single-family homes are federally backed.

    How long is the federal eviction moratorium in effect?

    The federal eviction moratorium took effect on March 27, 2020 and extends for 120 days.  Landlords that receive forbearances of federally backed multifamily mortgage loans must respect identical renter protections for the duration of the forbearance. §4023(d). Furthermore, the Act requires that Landlords of a covered dwelling may not require the tenant to vacate before the date that is 30 days after the date on which the lessor provides the tenant with a notice to vacate; and may not issue a notice to vacate until after the expiration of the moratorium.

    On April 2, 2020, Florida’s Governor Ron DeSantis signed Executive Order 20-94 (Emergency Management – COVID-19 – Mortgage Foreclosure and Eviction Relief). The Order suspends and tolls any statute providing for an eviction cause of action under Florida law for 45 days from April 2, 2020, as it relates to non-payment of rent by residential tenants. The Order has the effect of suspending any notice for non-payment such as a three-day notice or other notice to pay rent or quit. Governor DeSantis, speaking in advance of the issuance of the Order, stated that it does not relieve an individual’s obligation to make rent payments, but is intended to provide “targeted, temporary relief from certain … evictions for 45 days.”

    Updated: On May 14, 2020, Governor Desantis signed Executive Order 20-114 extending the 20-94 from May 17, 2020 until 12:01 a.m. on June 2, 2020.

    Broward County’s Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, overseen by Chief Judge Jack Tutor, has also issued an Administrative Order (AO) (Administrative Order 2020-27-Temp (IV)(F)) which provides new rules in Broward County concerning defaults and writs of possession. The AO states that until the Courts resume normal operations, in all county and civil cases:

    1. No default shall be entered by the Clerk of Court; and
    2. No court default may be sought unless submitted by motion to the presiding judge detailing exigent circumstances which may warrant judicial relief. In the event the presiding judge is unavailable, the matter shall be presented to the Administrative Judge of the County Court or the Administrative Judge of the Circuit Civil Division, as appropriate, and if either are unavailable, to the Chief Judge.
    3. No writs of possession may issue until normal operations of the court resume.

    Updated: On April 6, 2020, Broward County’s Chief Judge for the 17th Judicial Circuit issued a  suspension of normal operations through May 29, 2020 (AO 20-32-Temp) which conforms with the Florida Supreme Court’s Administrative Order No. AOSC20-23 (In Re: Comprehensive COVID-19 Emergency Measures for the Florida State Courts, extending state court COVID-19 emergency procedures through the month of May).

    Do these orders affect commercial evictions based on non-payment of rent? 

    It is important to point out, that Broward County’s Administrative Order does not differentiate actions for possession based on a commercial or residential tenancy as does the State and Federal Orders.

    Update: The Broward County Sheriff’s office maintains their temporary suspension of writ enforcement with the following statement, “the Broward Sheriff’s Office, in coordination with the 17th Judicial Circuit, has decided to temporarily cease all eviction activities until further notice due to the current public health crisis.” This suspension does not differentiate between residential and commercial writs.

    The purpose of this article is to provide you a summary of the most updated information available concerning developments concerning landlords in the State of Florida and more specifically, in Broward County. The author will attempt to keep this article up to date with additional information as it becomes available, but as the current state of affairs is a constantly evolving and fluid situation, you should refer to the sources cited herein for specific information. This is not intended to be a substitute for proper legal advice based on your specific facts and circumstances.

    A portion of our practice at Pompano Law is the representation of commercial and residential property owners. If you are a property owner in need of legal counsel, please feel free to reach out to us.

     

     

  • Change the Responsible Party with the IRS

    When you apply for an employer identification number (EIN) you, or the person applying, needs to provide the “tax responsible party” contact information consisting of a name, phone number and business address. Things change over time. People come and people go. There are numerous reasons to need to update this information. Updating used to be a cumbersome process of writing an old fashioned letter on company letterhead and mailing or faxing it to the IRS and hoping it was processed timely. Recently, the IRS issued new regulations (T.D. 9617) requiring any person assigned an EIN to provide updated contact information. Thankfully the process is somewhat streamlined now with the issuance of Form 8822B (Change of Address or Responsible Party). If you’re presently listed as the tax responsible party for an organization you are no longer affiliated with you should make sure the IRS won’t come calling on you when there’s an issue.

    https://www.irs.gov/uac/About-Form-8822B

     

  • Due Diligence for that Assignment of Lease

    A portion of our practice includes business transactions and frequently involves buying and selling businesses and other asset sales which include the assignment of a leasehold interest. In fact, for many businesses the leasehold interest (the lease) is one of the most valuable assets being sold. Everyone assumes that if the asset sale involves the conveyance of real property then a title search and owner’s policy for title insurance would be issued as part of the sale to ensure that the property is not encumbered by a mortgage, lien or other restriction. But what due diligence should be done for those sales including the assignment of a lease?

    Perhaps a short analogy would better illustrate the point. Let’s assume you are buying a restaurant. You know the restaurant industry well and have reviewed the financials of the restaurant and see a strong balance sheet and cash flow. You can see from the expenses that much of the net profit is due to the below market rent and it seems like there is a substantial term left on the lease, perhaps even an option to extend.  You close on your purchase and come to find out the landlord is in foreclosure. Will the foreclosure affect your new business? Do you risk losing your business if the property is sold at foreclosure?

    While negotiating an assignment of the lease in this age of foreclosures it is imperative that you do a little extra due diligence. Florida is a judicial foreclosure state. We are also a notice state. A lender seeking to foreclose a property must file a lis pendens as part of their foreclosure filing. The purpose of the lis pendens is to put the world on notice of the pending action for foreclosure. It also establishes the priority of interests.

    Before you close on your next asset sale you should make sure the due diligence you are doing includes the review of the public records for instruments like a lis pendens which may ultimately affect your lease. It is important that you obtain and rely on knowledgeable counsel to make sure you are protected. The attorney’s at Law Offices of Oates & Oates practice in the areas of business transactions and real estate. Please let us know whether we can assist in your next purchase or sale.

  • Wait…That’s Not My Signature!: The Need For Specific Denials

    A person’s signature can hold tremendous power.  The buying and selling of corporations are finalized with signatures. Wars are waged and alliances are created with just a stroke of a pen. In today’s world of rapid technological advancements, the importance given to one’s signature has remained incredibly high. Whatever the reason for this, one thing is clear. A person’s signature is a very intimate and personal belonging. It is often a person’s sole legal identifying mark. It goes without saying that forging another person’s signature is considered a major crime.

    According to renowned forensic document examiner Frank Harley Norwitch, “By placing a signature on a document we are implying intent on our part to agree with circumstances provided by that check, codicil, agreement, contract, etc.” [FN. 1] In this context, it is easy to see why the validity of signatures is so heavily scrutinized.

    In Florida, signatures are presumed to be genuine unless the validity of the signature is put at issue. (FLA. STAT. §673.307(1)(b)). When a party wishes to deny the validity of a signature, Florida Statute §673.307 (1) dictates:

    “Unless specifically denied in the pleadings each signature on an instrument is admitted.”

    This statute has been construed as requiring not merely a general denial, but a specific denial addressed to the appropriate allegations of the other party. Lipton v. Southeast First National Bank, 343 So.2d 927 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977), See also Ferris v. Nichols, 245 So.2d 660 (Fla. 4th DCA 1971). The reason for making specific denials necessary when denying a signature is explained by the Uniform Commercial Code. It reads:

    “The purpose of the requirement of a specific denial in the pleadings is to give the plaintiff notice that he must meet a claim of forgery or lack of authority as to the particular signature, and to afford him an opportunity to investigate and obtain evidence… In the absence of such specific denial, the signature stands admitted, and is not in issue.”

    The case of Lipton v. Southeast First National Bank gives us a clear example. In that case, a bank filed a complaint seeking to recover on two promissory notes and a written guarantee of one of those notes. The defendant’s answer denied the allegations of the complaint, but did not contain specific denials of the signatures on the instruments sued upon. The court ruled that the general denials given to the validity of the signatures were to be treated as admissions because the statute was very clear as to the requirement of specific denials.

    Similarly, in Ferris v. Nichols, the plaintiff filed a complaint that alleged that the defendant executed a promissory note to the plaintiff in five numbered paragraphs. The defendant’s answer read, “Defendant denies each and every allegation of paragraphs 1,2,3,4, and 5 of plaintiff’s complaint.” The court ruled that the defendant’s answer was a general denial of the plaintiff’s assertions and held that such general a general denial had the legal effect of admitting that the defendant did sign the note. Here again, the requirement that a signature be specifically denied is essential to challenging the validity of one’s signature.

    The distinction between general and specific denials of signatures is significant. Although the extra effort to plead a specific denial is minimal, it can make a world of difference in the outcome of a case. The attorneys at Oates & Oates P.A. are experienced in prosecuting and defendings claims involving the denial of a written signature.

    This article was co-authored by Jason Abitbol in 2012. Jason Abitbol was a graduate student pursuing a Juris Doctorate degree at Nova Southeastern University College of Law in Fort Lauderdale, Florida, and was a law clerk for the Law Offices of Oates & Oates, P.A.

  • Corporate Divorce & Dissolution

    What becomes of your corporation when its continuance is no longer feasible? Many think of such things only after that deadlock vote, or after a shareholder or member’s death or disability. After that unavoidable life event, death, disability, or disagreement, the question usually becomes what happens next? The answer depends on whether you have a shareholder agreement, or in the case of a limited liability company, an operating agreement.

    Florida Law has few favorable remedies for those situations where a partnership is no longer feasible. In the case of 50/50 owners, without a majority equity holder, any decision which is not agreed upon by both parties will result in a “deadlock.” Without some provision in the shareholder agreement which directs the parties, there are few choices to end a deadlock vote. The only alternative when the parties cannot agree, is to look to the organizational documents to determine who has the deciding vote or whether dissolution and winding down the business is the only alternative. Florida law permits the judicial dissolution and winding up of a business in the event of deadlocked shareholders, but this alternative is not without drawback.

    Aside from the cost of a judicial dissolution, such a remedy’s judicial termination means the end of the business. The better alternative is to prepare in advance for such an eventuality. Too often business owners are concerned with starting their business without the proper planning in place. A truism comes to mind; something is usually better than nothing. Even if the only planning done is to agree upon a majority stakeholder (i.e. a 51/49 partnership) you’ve still taken care of a large percentage of potential problems. But, what happens when a shareholder is disabled or has died. In the event of a shareholder death, shares of stock or membership interests are inherited by the next of kin regardless of their prior involvement.

    Proper planning for the succession of the business or buy-sell arrangements are an essential part of running a business. Benjamin Franklin had it right; an ounce of prevention is better than a pound of cure. The attorneys at Oates & Oates can counsel you in the proper way to protect your business from the foils of lack of planning. We look forward to sharing with you our knowledge and experience in the before and after effects of business planning.

  • Restrictive Covenants: Non-Compete versus Non-Solicitation

    Let’s imagine for a illustration purposes that you are a widget maker. Widget makers train for years to be certified in their field and they are highly compensated for their work. Once employed they use their widget making skills in lucrative careers where they build a client base and grow their widget making practice by working long hours and treating their customers well. Customer loyalty is high with widget makers.

    Imagine our widget maker is just graduating from their post-graduate or other schooling and is newly out in the workforce looking for a job. They are offered their ideal job with Small Town Widget (a very well respected widget operation). It is close to home and is exactly the type of widget making work they have trained for. The compensation is good and the widget making job seems to be “in the bag.” Then the hiring manager presents the widget maker with a restrictive covenant containing non-compete and non-solicitation provisions. She has never seen one of these before, so she asks her graduate school friends and others in the widget making industry about the restrictive covenants. All seem to indicate that it is pretty normal practice in the widget making industry to be required to sign one before starting your new job.

    From the hiring manager or owner’s perspective there are good reasons for requiring a restrictive covenant.  They don’t want you to build a rapport with the customers or clients and then move next door and compete against them.  Also, they don’t want you building a working relationship with the other employees of the business and taking them with you when you go off on your own. Our widget maker is concerned about the terms of the restrictive covenant which disallow her from widget making for a period of two (2) years after the termination of her employment in a geographic area defined as a five (5) mile radius from any Small Town Widget operation.

    Our widget maker rightly questions her ability to take her widget making skills somewhere else.  Small Town Widget has offices all over the surrounding three counties. She is worried that if her employment ends with Small Town Widget she won’t be permitted to obtain another job within 100 miles from her home. She calls her attorney and seeks some advise.

    Now imagine that widget maker is a doctor, dentist, CPA or other working professional. Employers like Small Town Widget have a vested interest in obtaining a restrictive covenant from their employees or independent contracts. However, if Small Town Widget is hiring her to bring her training and skills to their office, their only concern should be their customers and employees and less about her going out next door and opening a competing business. After all, there are lots of widget making offices scattered throughout the area, but if she can’t solicit the customers or employees of Small Town Widget, then what concern is it of the Small Town Widget office to keep her from working within the restricted area?

    Restrictive covenants, non-competes and non-solicitations, are a practice area that the attorneys at Law Offices of Oates & Oates, P.A. have much experience. Whether you are the employer or employee, you should seek the advice of knowledgeable and experienced counsel before hiring new employees or signing a restrictive covenant. Please contact our offices to discuss how we might be able to assist you.

  • Abandoned Property: Landlord Beware

    Link: Read more about this firm’s eviction services

    Whether you are a seasoned landlord with valuable management skills or a first-time landlord, the issue of eviction or abandonment could be an issue you have to face. The issue of abandoned property appears in two contexts. On one hand, a landlord could face the issue when the tenant has abandoned the property altogether by leaving for an indefinite period of time without giving notice. On the other, a landlord could face the issue when the lease has expired or been terminated yet the tenant fails to take all of his or her possessions with him. What are your rights and responsibilities as a landlord in each situation?

    In the first situation, a landlord is dealing with an abandoned dwelling upon which the tenant probably owes rent. The landlord needs to think about whether or not the property is actually abandoned as defined by Florida law. Florida Statute § 83.59(3)(c) states that a tenant has abandoned the dwelling when he or she is absent from the property for a period of time equal to one-half the time for periodic rental payment, as long as the rent is not current and the tenant has not notified the landlord of his or her absence in writing. For example, in Shorter Home Solutions, LLC v. Tyrance Kingdom, the Broward County court held that statutory abandonment of the property was apparent because the tenant, Tyrance Kingdom, had abandoned the dwelling when he left the premises without paying his monthly rent, without advising the landlord of his absence, and without returning to the premises until after the 15th day of the month. The landlord, Shorter Home Solutions, was entitled to remove the tenant’s personal property from the premises and was awarded a judgment of the balance on the rent and the reasonable cost of attorney’s fees.

    The second situation involves a bit more action on behalf of the landlord. This situation arises when the lease has expired or been terminated, be it by eviction or abandonment, and the tenant has left behind personal property in the dwelling. Under Florida Statute § 715.104, the landlord must give written notice to the tenant or any person he or she reasonably believes to be the owner of the property. The notice must describe the property, must advise the person that reasonable costs of storage may be charged, must state where the property can be claimed, and must set out the date before which the property must be claimed.

    If the tenant or owner of the property responds within the date specified and pays the reasonable costs of storage, the landlord must release the property to that person. However, if no one claims the property before the date specified, and the landlord believes that the resale value of the property will be less than $500, he or she may retain it for his or her own use, pursuant to Florida Statute § 715.109. Otherwise, the property must be sold at public sale by competitive bidding.

    Although landlords are an integral part of property management businesses in today’s society and their rights and responsibilities are set out by Florida law, disputes between them and their tenants are inevitable in these situations. If you face either of these situations as a landlord or tenant, the attorneys at Oates & Oates have the experience to help counsel you and enforce your rights.

    Ellen Stewart is a graduate student pursuing a juris doctor degree at Stetson University College of Law in Saint Petersburg, Florida. She is a legal research assistant for the Law Offices of Oates & Oates, P.A.

  • Escrow Disputes: From Escrow to Interpleader

    Escrow agents are a fundamental tool in the practice of business and sales, however their use could lead to disputes rather than successful transactions. Take a contract for the purchase and sale of a property for example. This transaction is simple on face, but that is true only if the parties act as they agreed. A money deposit is placed into escrow and an agreement is made that the money is to be delivered to the designated party upon the performance of another condition or event, for example the relinquishment of the seller’s property rights. If the parties act according to their agreement, then the escrow agent is merely an intermediary in the deal. However, problems arise when parties do not perform as planned.

    If either of the parties does not act as they agreed to or frustrates the transaction, that party terminates the deal and most likely the contract all together. The money that was placed into escrow becomes idle because the escrow agent is usually instructed not to release or refund any of the money until the dispute between the parties is settled. The escrow agent, in order to prevent the risk of multiple lawsuits against him, can file for what is called an interpleader action.

    An interpleader action is defined in the Florida Rules of Civil Procedure under Rule 1.240. The rule states “persons having claims against the plaintiff may be joined as defendants and required to interplead when their claims are such that the plaintiff is or may be exposed to double or multiple liability.” The State of Florida bases this rule on the theory that conflicting parties should litigate their claims among themselves without involving the plaintiff or middleman in their dispute.

    An interpleader action should be entered into when the escrow agent or middleman has no interest in the money that is the subject matter of the dispute and there is no independent liability asserted against him. An interpleader action requires the intermediary to place the money into the court’s custody. The intermediary or escrow agent is then dismissed as a party to the interpleader action and the defending parties must litigate and argue for their rights to the money among themselves.

    But the intermediary or escrow agent does not walk away and leave the parties to dispute before recovering costs and attorneys fees incurred in initiating an interpleader action. Escrow agents are entitled to recover these fees and costs under the Florida Rules of Civil Procedure. In the case Ellison v. Riddle (Sept. 3, 1964), the Florida District Court of Appeals, Second District, defined this entitlement. The court stated “in order to be entitled to such an award the plaintiff must prove his total disinterest in the stake he holds other than that of bringing it into court so that conflicting claims thereto can be judicially determined…the plaintiff must also show he did nothing to cause the conflicting claims.”

    A typical escrow agent will have total disinterest in the money deposit they hold during a transaction or sale and will have no involvement in the creation of the conflict that is the subject matter of the lawsuit. Therefore, an escrow agent is entitled to recover the costs and attorneys fees incurred in filing the interpleader action. If you believe you are entitled to such awards, the service and assistance of a knowledgeable attorney is a valuable tool. Please contact the office of Oates & Oates for more information.

    Ellen Stewart is a graduate student pursuing a juris doctor degree at Stetson University College of Law in Saint Petersburg, Florida. She is a legal research assistant for the Law Offices of Oates & Oates, P.A.

  • Is your foreign judgment enforceable in Florida?

    More and more frequently I speak to judgment creditors with a judgment issued by a state other than Florida or from a jurisdiction outside the United States. The process of registering that judgment in Florida is called domestication. Once domesticated, the foreign judgment is given full faith and credit and is enforceable by Florida courts to the same extent as a Florida judgment.

    The issue that I notice more frequently is that some judgments issued by other state and foreign jurisdictions won’t meet the requirements of due process and the US Constitution when it comes to the question of whether the issuing court had personal jurisdiction over the defendant/debtor. Florida’s domestication or registration process recognizes the judgment debtor’s ability to contest the enforceability of the judgment at any time for lack of the original court’s jurisdiction over the judgment debtor.

    Let me explain by example. Some states provide very liberal jurisdiction (long-arm) statues which provide that those states have jurisdiction over non-resident persons or entities. Provided certain circumstances are met, whether or not the defendant/debtor was subject to the jurisdiction of the foreign court can be raised for the first time in Florida. This defense is an exercise in the US Constitutional limitations on due process grounds.

    As an illustration, an Arizona resident or business has a contract dispute with a Florida individual or corporation. The Florida individual or corporation does not have an office in Arizona nor has the Floridian ever done business in Arizona. If the agreement does not state where venue and jurisdiction is for any dispute between the parties, can an Arizonian sue the Floridian in an Arizona court? Perhaps Arizona law permits this; I am not a licensed Arizona attorney and do not know Arizona law. However, as soon as you bring your Arizona judgment to Florida to collect it, the judgment debtor will object that they were not subject to the jurisdiction of the Arizona courts. Florida law permits the judgment debtor in this example to raise this defense at any time (provided it hasn’t been waived in some fashion). Now you, as the judgment creditor, have shown your cards in your collection attempt and you are barred from collection based upon jurisdictional grounds. You are left with only two options. 1.) You must reinstitiute your suit in a Florida court in the jurisdiction where the debtor resides, has assets or has an office for the conduct of its business. Caution: This may subject you to counterclaims in Florida. Alternatively, 2.) You can attempt to collect only against assets of the debtor located in the issuing court’s jurisdiction.

    Read more about the domestication process in Florida

    Before you hire an attorney to help you bring your judgment to Florida, make sure they consult with you on the issue of the originating court’s jurisdiction. Because this is such a tricky area of the law, make sure you hire an attorney with experience in dealing with the nuiances of this area of practice. If you would like to the speak with an attorney about the collection of your judgment, please call. We also represent Defendant/Debtors attempting to avoid domestication.

    The hiring of a lawyer is an important decision that should not be based solely upon advertisements.  Before you decide, ask us to send you free written information about our qualifications and experience.