Elman v. Cadesky

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Elman v. Cadesky

553 So. 2d 391, 14 Fla. L. Weekly 2910, 1989 Fla. App. LEXIS 6983, 1989 WL 149583

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided December 13, 1989·No. No. 88-2556·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from the dismissal with prejudice of a third-party complaint. Based upon the record we determine that it has not been demonstrated that appellant could not amend his pleading to state a cause of action. We further find that appellant has not previously been given an opportunity to amend this particular pleading. Accordingly, it was error to dismiss the complaint without giving appellant at least one opportunity to amend. See Delia & Wilson, Inc. v. Wilson, 448 So.2d 621 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984).

REVERSED AND REMANDED.

HERSEY, C.J., and LETTS and WARNER, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from the dismissal with prejudice of a third-party complaint. Based upon the record we determine that it has not been demonstrated that appellant could not amend his pleading to state a cause of action. We further find that appellant has not previously been given an opportunity to amend this particular pleading. Accordingly, it was error to dismiss the complaint without giving appellant at least one opportunity to amend. See Delia & Wilson, Inc. v. Wilson, 448 So.2d 621 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984).

REVERSED AND REMANDED.

HERSEY, C.J., and LETTS and WARNER, JJ., concur.

Elman v. Cadesky, 553 So. 2d 391, 14 Fla. L. Weekly 2910, 1989 Fla. App. LEXIS 6983, 1989 WL 149583 (Fla. Ct. App. 1989).

Pincite

553 So. 2d 391 (Elman v. Cadesky) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related