Atlas v. Stolberg

694 So. 2d 772, 1997 WL 194635
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedApril 23, 1997
DocketNo. 95-3344
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 694 So. 2d 772 (Atlas v. Stolberg) 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
Atlas v. Stolberg, 694 So. 2d 772, 1997 WL 194635 (Fla. Ct. App. 1997).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We affirm as to all issues. Appellees are immune under the principles of Levin, Middlebrooks, Mabie, Thomas, Mayes & Mitchell, P. A. v. United States Fire Insurance Co., 639 So.2d 606 (Fla.1994). Appellees may raise this affirmative defense in a motion to dismiss as it appears on the face of the complaint. See Stern v. First Nat’l Bank of S. Miami, 275 So.2d 58 (Fla. 3d DCA 1973). With respect to appellant’s claim that the attorneys are liable under 42 U.S.C. section 1983, it is well settled that private lawyers are not state actors for purposes of section 1983 liability. See Barnard v. Young, 720 F.2d 1188 (10th Cir.1983); Black v. Bayer, 672 F.2d 309, 314 (3d Cir.1982).

Affirmed.

GUNTHER, C.J., and WARNER and KLEIN, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Prudential Ins. v. Florida Dept. of Ins.
694 So. 2d 772 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1997)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
694 So. 2d 772, 1997 WL 194635, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/atlas-v-stolberg-fladistctapp-1997.