From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Mosby & Russell Engineering Associates, Inc. v. Hudson Co.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District
Aug 30, 1974
299 So. 2d 53 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1974)

Opinion

No. 74-121.

August 30, 1974.

Interlocutory Appeal from the Circuit Court, Orange County; Frederick Pfeiffer, Judge.

Daniel E. Scott, Dillon Scott, Sarasota, for appellant.

Robert B. White, Jr., Best Sears, Orlando, for appellee-Hudson.

William B. Wilson, Maguire, Voorhis Wells, Orlando, for appellee-Shell.


We conclude that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion of appellant-third party defendant to dismiss on the grounds of improper venue. See, Dorr-Oliver, Inc. v. Linder Industrial Machinery Company, Fla.App. 1972, 263 So.2d 237; United States v. Acord, 10 Cir. 1954, 209 F.2d 709, cert. denied, 347 U.S. 975, 74 S.Ct. 786, 98 L.Ed. 1115; McGrath v. Lund's Fisheries, D.Del. 1959, 170 F. Supp. 173; 6 Wright and Miller, Federal Practice and Procedure, Section 1445 (1971); 3 Moore, Federal Practice, Section 14.28(2), (2nd ed. 1974).

Affirmed.

OWEN, C.J., and WALDEN and CROSS, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Mosby & Russell Engineering Associates, Inc. v. Hudson Co.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District
Aug 30, 1974
299 So. 2d 53 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1974)
Case details for

Mosby & Russell Engineering Associates, Inc. v. Hudson Co.

Case Details

Full title:MOSBY RUSSELL ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC., APPELLANT, v. HUDSON COMPANY…

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District

Date published: Aug 30, 1974

Citations

299 So. 2d 53 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1974)

Citing Cases

State, Dept. of Transp. v. San Marco

Other courts have held that an ancillary third party claim, such as San Marco's against DOT, may in the trial…