Case Name: Barry WAITE and Fox & Co., Appellants, v. SUMMIT LEASING & CAPITAL INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION, a corporation, and Wilbert Harold McCauley, Appellees
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1983-11-23
Citations: 441 So. 2d 185
Docket Number: No. 83-1661
Parties: Barry WAITE and Fox & Co., Appellants, v. SUMMIT LEASING & CAPITAL INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION, a corporation, and Wilbert Harold McCauley, Appellees.
Judges: HURLEY and DELL, JJ., concur.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 441
Pages: 185–185

Head Matter:
Barry WAITE and Fox & Co., Appellants, v. SUMMIT LEASING & CAPITAL INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION, a corporation, and Wilbert Harold McCauley, Appellees.
No. 83-1661.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.
Nov. 23, 1983.
Eric B. Meyers, P.A., Barbara E. Vice-vich, P.A., and Maxine M. Long of Shutts & Bowen, Miami, and Parker, Chaplin, Flat-tau & Klimpl, New York City, of counsel, for appellants.
Peter J. Winders and James A. Gresser of Carlton, Fields, Ward, Emmanuel, Smith & Cutler, P.A., Tampa, for appellee, Summit.

Opinion:
BERANEK, Judge.
The defendants appeal a nonfinal order denying their motion to dismiss based on forum non conveniens. We affirm.
The appellants are a multistate accounting firm and various partners. The firm's headquarters are in Denver, Colorado, yet it has an office in Broward County, Florida, and one of the firm's partners lives there. The only issue raised on appeal is whether the trial court abused its discretion in denying the defendant's motion to dismiss based on forum non conveniens.
A court may only consider application of the doctrine of forum non conven-iens when both parties to the action are nonresidents of the state of Florida and the cause of action sued upon arose outside of Florida. Houston v. Caldwell, 359 So.2d 858 (Fla.1978). In this case, plaintiff was not a resident of Florida. However, the defendant partnership has a Florida office and a partner lives in the state. Therefore, the firm should be considered a resident of Florida, and the trial court did not err in denying defendants' motion. We decline to follow the appellants' urging that we depart from Houston v. Caldwell, supra.
AFFIRMED.
HURLEY and DELL, JJ., concur.