## Facts

- Jeffrey and Joanne Cannella were injured allegedly due to negligence by Mock Plumbing Contractor, Inc. (Mock).
- Mock was insured under a commercial general liability policy issued by Auto-Owners Insurance Company.
- Mock was administratively dissolved in October 1991.
- In the Cannellas’ tort action against Mock, process was personally served on June 3, 1992, on Monica Mock, listed in state records as Mock’s registered agent and the only person associated with the corporation in those records.
- The Cannellas obtained a default, tried damages, and obtained a judgment against Mock in June 1995.
- After judgment, Mock assigned to the Cannellas its rights against Auto-Owners under the policy.
- The Cannellas then sued Auto-Owners, alleging Auto-Owners breached the policy by refusing to pay the tort judgment up to policy limits and that the Cannellas were third-party beneficiaries.
- In the coverage action, Auto-Owners moved to set aside the tort judgment, claiming the judgment was void (or voidable/unenforceable) because service on a dissolved corporation had to be made on the director as statutory trustee, not on the former registered agent.

## Issues

1. Whether a liability insurer may collaterally attack a tort judgment against its insured in a later coverage action based on alleged defective service on a dissolved corporate insured.
2. Whether personal service on the dissolved corporation’s listed registered agent rendered the tort judgment void for lack of personal jurisdiction, or at most voidable and therefore not subject to collateral attack.

## Decision

- The Florida Supreme Court quashed the district court’s decision that had treated the tort judgment as void and reinstated the trial court’s ruling for the Cannellas.
- The Court held Auto-Owners could not set aside the tort judgment in the coverage action on the asserted defective-service theory.
- The Court concluded the service accomplished by personal service on the individual listed in state corporate records as the registered agent was sufficient such that the tort judgment was not void for lack of personal jurisdiction.
- The case was remanded for further proceedings consistent with reinstating the Cannellas’ ability to pursue recovery against Auto-Owners under the assigned rights, up to policy limits.

## Legal Principles

- A collateral attack on a prior judgment is generally permitted only if the judgment is void for lack of jurisdiction; a merely voidable judgment must be challenged directly through proper procedures and time limits.
- Disputed or technical noncompliance with service requirements does not automatically render a judgment void for collateral-attack purposes.
- In this context, service on the person listed in state records as a dissolved corporation’s registered agent and sole associated individual may be sufficient to support personal jurisdiction and prevent an insurer from later treating the judgment as void in a separate coverage action.

## Conclusion

The Florida Supreme Court held that the insurer could not avoid coverage by collaterally attacking the underlying tort judgment as void based on claimed defects in service on a dissolved corporate insured, and it reinstated the trial court’s ruling favoring enforcement of the judgment through the insured’s assignment of policy rights.


Cannella v. Auto-Owners Ins. Co., 801 So. 2d 94 (Fla. 2001)