Alexander v. City of Miami

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Alexander v. City of Miami

833 So. 2d 210, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 18561, 2002 WL 31828834

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided December 18, 2002·No. No. 3D02-1015·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We affirm the order of summary judgment, as the City was not liable as a matter of law for any injuries sustained by plaintiff at the location alleged in his pre-suit notice and his complaint.

The trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying plaintiffs motion to amend. See Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.190(b) (2001); Frenz Enters., Inc. v. Port Everglades, 746 So.2d 498, 503 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999) (holding that trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying leave to amend complaint where proposed amendment would “materially vary the originally asserted grounds for relief’).

AFFIRMED.

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

PER CURIAM.

We affirm the order of summary judgment, as the City was not liable as a matter of law for any injuries sustained by plaintiff at the location alleged in his pre-suit notice and his complaint.

The trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying plaintiffs motion to amend. See Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.190(b) (2001); Frenz Enters., Inc. v. Port Everglades, 746 So.2d 498, 503 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999) (holding that trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying leave to amend complaint where proposed amendment would “materially vary the originally asserted grounds for relief’).

AFFIRMED.

Alexander v. City of Miami, 833 So. 2d 210, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 18561, 2002 WL 31828834 (Fla. Ct. App. 2002).

Pincite

833 So. 2d 210 (Alexander v. City of Miami) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related