A Florida court will typically analyze two questions when resolving issues of personal jurisdiction—whether personal jurisdiction exists over the non-resident defendant under the state long-arm statute, and whether that exercise of jurisdiction violates the Fourteenth Amendment. In Abromats v. Abromats, a Florida court engaged in this analysis, considering a motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction. Accordingly, the court determined that it had in rem jurisdiction because it was the trust’s principal place of administration and the trustee had not provided notice otherwise. Also, the court concluded that it had jurisdiction over the defendant, using the analysis above. The conferred jurisdiction of the trust’s principal place of administration satisfied Florida’s long-arm statute.
See Brian Spiro, Pleading Florida’s Long-Arm Statute in Federal Trust Dispute, Florida Probate Lawyers, August 19, 2016.
