Adams v. Lieberman

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Adams v. Lieberman

507 So. 2d 716, 12 Fla. L. Weekly 1270, 1987 Fla. App. LEXIS 8253

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMay 19, 1987

DocketNo. BP-28

StatusPublished

This text of 507 So. 2d 716 (Adams v. Lieberman) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Adams v. Lieberman, 507 So. 2d 716, 12 Fla. L. Weekly 1270, 1987 Fla. App. LEXIS 8253 (Fla. Ct. App. 1987).

Pincite

Opinion

ERVIN, Judge.

Appellants appeal the granting of a motion to dismiss their complaint. In so doing, the trial court had considered a prior judgment in appellants’ favor in another case. We reverse, finding that the trial court went beyond the four corners of the complaint in considering the motion. See Dawson v. Blue Cross Association, 293 So.2d 90, 93 (Fla. 1st DCA 1974). Accord Livingston v. Spires, 481 So.2d 87 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986) (“Since appellant’s complaint did not mention the prior final judgment of dissolution, the complaint does not ‘affirmatively and clearly’ show the ‘conclusive applicability’ of res judicata to bar this action.”). By virtue of our decision regarding the first point raised, we do not address appellant’s second issue.

Reversed and remanded for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

WIGGINTON, J., and FRANK, RICHARD H., Associate Judge, concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

ERVIN, Judge.

Appellants appeal the granting of a motion to dismiss their complaint. In so doing, the trial court had considered a prior judgment in appellants’ favor in another case. We reverse, finding that the trial court went beyond the four corners of the complaint in considering the motion. See Dawson v. Blue Cross Association, 293 So.2d 90, 93 (Fla. 1st DCA 1974). Accord Livingston v. Spires, 481 So.2d 87 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986) (“Since appellant’s complaint did not mention the prior final judgment of dissolution, the complaint does not ‘affirmatively and clearly’ show the ‘conclusive applicability’ of res judicata to bar this action.”). By virtue of our decision regarding the first point raised, we do not address appellant’s second issue.

Reversed and remanded for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

WIGGINTON, J., and FRANK, RICHARD H., Associate Judge, concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

507 So. 2d 716, 12 Fla. L. Weekly 1270, 1987 Fla. App. LEXIS 8253, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/adams-v-lieberman-fladistctapp-1987.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack