in this case concerns Florida land. In relation to that land transaction, Fleming delivered its legal opinion into Florida for use by the Florida bank, knowing and expecting that its work product would be used by the bank in transacting the Florida land loan. By its conduct, the firm's contacts with Florida were such that it could reasonably anticipate being haled into a Florida court should damages occur as a result of a negligently rendered legal opinion. The fact that Fleming is not licensed to practice law in Florida cannot be controlling because of the firm's purposeful actions within the state. Based on the foregoing, Florida clearly has a legitimate and reasonable interest in providing a forum for the suit. Consequently, any hardship Fleming might suffer from having
36 Cal.Rptr.3d 395 (2005)
134 Cal.App.4th 918
Richard W. CASTEEL, Plaintiff and Appellant,
v.
COUNTY OF SAN JOAQUIN et al., Defendants and Appellants.
No. C048797.
Court of Appeal, Third District.
November 18, 2005.
Francois X. Sorba, San Mateo, CA, for Plaintiff and Appellant.
Daniel C. Cederborg, Deputy County Counsel, for Defendants and Appellants.
Robert Fien, The Fien Law Group, Sacramento, for California Apartment Association as Amicus Curiae on behalf of Plaintiff and Appellant.
John J. Sansone, San Diego, for California State Association of Counties as Amicus Curiae on behalf of Defendants and Appellants.
HULL, J.
Plaintiff, Richard W. Casteel, a nonresident of San Joaquin County (County), initiated this mandamus action to compel the County to refund fees paid by him for solid waste disposal services provided at several of his rental properties located in the unincorporated areas of the County. The