Legal Opinion

Pomerantz v. Hollowell

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided February 24, 1987No. 86-1622PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Per curiam

We reverse the trial court’s order denying Pomerantz’s motion to dismiss for improper service. It is well established that nonresident witnesses who voluntarily enter the state to testify in pending litigation are immune from service of process for a reasonable time before and after they testify. Stokes v. Bell, 441 So.2d 146 (Fla. 1983); Lienard v. De Witt, 153 So.2d 302 (Fla.1963); Murphy & Jordan, Inc. v. Insurance Co. of N. Am., 278 So.2d 296 (Fla. 3d DCA 1973). The evidence established that Pomerantz was a resident of Georgia who entered Florida only to provide deposition testimony in a…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Lienard v. DeWittSupreme Court of Florida · 1963
  2. Murphy & Jordan, Inc. v. Insurance Company of North AmericaDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1973
  3. Stokes v. BellSupreme Court of Florida · 1983

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Francini v. INTERN. MARBLE TRADES, INC.District Court of Appeal of Florida · 1989
  2. Planet Fitness International Franchise v. P JEG-United, LLCDistrict Court, D. New Hampshire · 2022
  3. In re Marriage of GonzalezDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1991

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API