Home/District Court of Appeal of Florida/Corsbie v. Corsbie

Corsbie v. Corsbie

137 So. 3d 1194, 2014 WL 1493551, 2014 Fla. App. LEXIS 5541
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedApril 16, 2014
DocketNo. 3D12-3326
StatusPublished

This text of 137 So. 3d 1194 (Corsbie v. Corsbie) 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
Corsbie v. Corsbie, 137 So. 3d 1194, 2014 WL 1493551, 2014 Fla. App. LEXIS 5541 (Fla. Ct. App. 2014).

Opinion

SUAREZ, J.

We agree with the appellant that it was error for the trial court to have denied the motion to amend with prejudice. An amendment to the complaint identifying the plaintiff as the personal representative and limiting the claims to conversion would relate back and should have been allowed. [1195]*1195See Eisen v. Philip Morris USA, Inc. 126 So.3d 323 (Fla. 3d DCA 2013). We affirm the remainder of the trial court’s order denying the motion to amend with prejudice.

Reversed in part and remanded for further proceedings.

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

Related

Estate of Eisen v. Philip Morris USA, Inc.
126 So. 3d 323 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2013)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
137 So. 3d 1194, 2014 WL 1493551, 2014 Fla. App. LEXIS 5541, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/corsbie-v-corsbie-fladistctapp-2014.