Case Name: Helen COHEN, Appellant, v. Zacharia DRUCKER, individually, and Drucker Construction of Florida, Inc., a dissolved Florida corporation, Appellees
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1996-07-31
Citations: 677 So. 2d 953
Docket Number: No. 96-1062
Parties: Helen COHEN, Appellant, v. Zacharia DRUCKER, individually, and Drucker Construction of Florida, Inc., a dissolved Florida corporation, Appellees.
Judges: POLEN and SHAHOOD, JJ., concur.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 677
Pages: 953–956

Head Matter:
Helen COHEN, Appellant, v. Zacharia DRUCKER, individually, and Drucker Construction of Florida, Inc., a dissolved Florida corporation, Appellees.
No. 96-1062.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.
July 31, 1996.
Gary S. Phillips and Jeremy A.' Koss of Phillips, Eisinger & Koss, P.A., Hollywood, for appellant.
Susan E. Trench of Goldstein and Tanen, P.A., Miami, and Michael M. Milo of Tunik & Company, Tel Aviv, Israel, for appellees.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
We affirm the order of the trial court vacating the defaults (and resulting default final judgments), and dismissing for insufficiency of service of process as to both defendants. The purported service on defendant Drucker Construction of Florida, Inc. (DCF) was so lacking in compliance with the requirements of sections 48.101 and 48.194, Florida Statutes (1991), as to render such service void.
As to defendant Zacharia Drucker individually, there was record evidence that he had actual knowledge of the proceedings, despite irregularities in service, so service on him was voidable, not void. Paleias v. Wang, 632 So.2d 1132 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994) (Klein, J., concurring). The complaint filed by Mrs. Cohen, however, failed to contain sufficient, non-conclusory allegations as to how defendant Drucker came within the long-arm jurisdiction of the Florida courts. As Drucker's affidavit reflects he is a citizen of Israel, where service was attempted, the complaint must state more than "Venue is proper in Broward County, Florida." Intercarga Internacional De Carga, S.A. v. Harper Group, 659 So.2d 1208 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995).
Finally, we deem the trial court's grant of the motion to vacate as constituting an implicit finding that defendants moved with due diligence to vacate the defaults. Under the facts of this case, we will not revisit this finding on appeal.
AFFIRMED.
POLEN and SHAHOOD, JJ., concur.
PARIENTE, J., dissents with opinion.