Third District Court of Appeal
State of Florida
Opinion filed June 29, 2022.
Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
________________
No. 3D22-134
Lower Tribunal No. 19-16551
________________
Helga Zielcke,
Appellant,
vs.
Ilva Rubio, et al.,
Appellees.
An Appeal from a non-final order from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade
County, Oscar Rodriguez-Fonts, Judge.
Arnaldo Vélez, P.A., and Arnaldo Vélez, for appellant.
Law Office of Michelle C. Fraga, P.A., and Michelle C. Fraga, for
appellees.
Before EMAS, SCALES and BOKOR, JJ.
SCALES, J.
Appellant Helga Zielcke appeals the trial court’s January 19, 2022 non-
final order denying her March 2, 2021 motion to quash service of process
and to dismiss the complaint of Appellees Ilva Rubio and Vivian Bostwick for
an alleged lack of jurisdiction.
We affirm the trial court’s determination that it has personal jurisdiction
over Zielcke. Appellees’ second amended complaint contains adequate
allegations subjecting Zielcke to the specific jurisdiction of the circuit court.
See § 48.193(1)(a)2., Fla. Stat. (2020). 1
With regard to that portion of the challenged order denying Zielcke’s
motion to quash service of process, however, we are compelled to remand
for further proceedings. Specifically, the challenged order does not address,
much less adjudicate, Zielcke’s argument (made both below and on appeal)
that Appellees’ purported service of process on Zielcke (via the Florida
Secretary of State) failed to comply with the relevant provisions of the Hague
Convention on the Service Abroad of Judicial and Extrajudicial Documents
on Civil or Commercial Matters (“Hague Convention”). As it is undisputed
that Zielcke is a resident of Colombia and that Colombia is a signatory to the
1
While the trial court’s order articulates a different basis for personal
jurisdiction, our de novo review of the record supports the trial court’s
ultimate determination that the circuit court has personal jurisdiction over
Zielcke. See Elmex Corp. v. Atlantic Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass’n of Fort
Lauderdale, 325 So. 2d 58, 61 n.3 (Fla. 4th DCA 1976) (“It is well settled that
an appeal court will affirm an order of the trial court on appeal consistent with
any theory revealed by the record, regardless of the reason stated in the
order under review.”).
2
Hague Convention, Appellees’ compliance with the relevant provisions of the
Hague Convention plainly is required to effectuate service on Zielcke, absent
an explicit finding of a legally cognizable exception to such compliance. §
48.194(1), Fla. Stat. (2020) (“Service of process on persons outside the
United States may be required to conform to the provisions of the Hague
Convention on the Service Abroad of Judicial and Extrajudicial Documents
in Civil or Commercial Matters.”); Puigbo v. Medex Trading, LLC, 209 So. 3d
598, 601 (Fla. 3d DCA 2014) (concluding that, because personal service is
required under Florida law, service on a defendant residing abroad requires
conformance with the Hague Convention, when applicable). Indeed, the trial
court entered prior orders in this case recognizing the importance of Hague
Convention compliance for service of process on Zielcke.
We therefore affirm that portion of the challenged order determining
that the circuit court has personal jurisdiction over Zielcke, but we remand
the case to the lower court to conduct whatever proceedings it deems
appropriate to adjudicate the issue of whether Appellees’ service of process
on Zielcke comported with the relevant requirements of the Hague
Convention, and to enter an appropriate order upon making such
determination.
Affirmed in part; remanded in part, with instructions.
3