Case Name: MC TRUST, etc., Appellant, v. Solita Cohen DE MISHAAN, etc., Appellee.
Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 2019-04-03
Citations: 273 So. 3d 1065
Docket Number: No. 3D18-211
Parties: MC TRUST, etc., Appellant,
v.
Solita Cohen DE MISHAAN, etc., Appellee.
Judges: Before EMAS, C.J., and LOGUE and HENDON, JJ.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Third Series
Volume: 273
Pages: 1065–1066

Head Matter:
MC TRUST, etc., Appellant,
v.
Solita Cohen DE MISHAAN, etc., Appellee.
No. 3D18-211
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
Opinion filed April 3, 2019
Rehearing Denied May 08, 2019
Philip D. Parrish, P.A., and Philip D. Parrish ; Scale Law and Jaime D. Guttman, for appellant.
Ross & Girten, and Lauri Waldman Ross and Theresa L. Girten ; Raquel A. Rodriguez, for appellee.
Before EMAS, C.J., and LOGUE and HENDON, JJ.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Steven Mishaan ("Steven"), as trustee and on behalf of MC Trust, appeals a final judgment dismissing with prejudice his action against Solita Cohen de Mishaan ("Solita"), individually and as trustee of MC Trust, for lack of personal jurisdiction and, alternatively, on the basis of forum non conveniens. We affirm.
After an evidentiary hearing, the trial court determined that it did not have personal jurisdiction over Solita because she is not a resident of Florida and because Steven failed to meet his burden of establishing that she had the requisite minimum contacts with the State of Florida or that the alleged actionable tort was committed in Florida. Upon our review of the evidentiary hearing transcript and the record on appeal, we agree. See § 48.193(2), Fla. Stat. (2017) ; § 736.0202(2), Fla. Stat. (2017) ; Venetian Salami Co. v. Parthenais, 554 So.2d 499 (Fla. 1989) ; Machtinger v. Inertial Airline Servs., Inc., 937 So.2d 730, 734 (Fla. 3d DCA 2006).
Affirmed.
Because we affirm the trial court's order on the basis of lack of personal jurisdiction, we do not reach the merits of the forum non conveniens issue.
We affirm without comment the other issues raised on appeal.