Eric Flite v. Medi-Trans, Inc., a/k/a MTI Medi-Trans, Inc., a/k/a Meditrans Corporation and United National Transport Network, Inc.

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Eric Flite v. Medi-Trans, Inc., a/k/a MTI Medi-Trans, Inc., a/k/a Meditrans Corporation and United National Transport Network, Inc.

174 So. 3d 1128, 2015 Fla. App. LEXIS 14519, 2015 WL 5725600

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedSeptember 30, 2015

Docket4D13-4572

StatusPublished

This text of 174 So. 3d 1128 (Eric Flite v. Medi-Trans, Inc., a/k/a MTI Medi-Trans, Inc., a/k/a Meditrans Corporation and United National Transport Network, Inc.) 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

Eric Flite v. Medi-Trans, Inc., a/k/a MTI Medi-Trans, Inc., a/k/a Meditrans Corporation and United National Transport Network, Inc., 174 So. 3d 1128, 2015 Fla. App. LEXIS 14519, 2015 WL 5725600 (Fla. Ct. App. 2015).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The circuit court granted a defense motion to dismiss, either because the defendant was entitled to immunity under the workers’ compensation statute or because, in an earlier settlement, the plaintiff released the defendant. Resolution of these issues required the court to make factual determinations outside of the pleadings. Ordinarily, affirmative defenses cannot be raised by a motion to dismiss, unless “the face of the complaint is sufficient to demonstrate the existence of the defense.” Wallisville Corp. v. McGuinness, 154 So.3d 501, 504 (Fla. 4th DCA 2015). See also Stubbs v. Plantation Gen. Hosp. Ltd. P’ship, 988 So.2d 683 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008). We reverse and remand for the circuit court to consider the issues by way of summary judgment or an evidentiary hearing.

GROSS, TAYLOR, JJ., and SHEPHERD, CAROLINE, Associate Judge, concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

The circuit court granted a defense motion to dismiss, either because the defendant was entitled to immunity under the workers’ compensation statute or because, in an earlier settlement, the plaintiff released the defendant. Resolution of these issues required the court to make factual determinations outside of the pleadings. Ordinarily, affirmative defenses cannot be raised by a motion to dismiss, unless “the face of the complaint is sufficient to demonstrate the existence of the defense.” Wallisville Corp. v. McGuinness, 154 So.3d 501, 504 (Fla. 4th DCA 2015). See also Stubbs v. Plantation Gen. Hosp. Ltd. P’ship, 988 So.2d 683 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008). We reverse and remand for the circuit court to consider the issues by way of summary judgment or an evidentiary hearing.

GROSS, TAYLOR, JJ., and SHEPHERD, CAROLINE, Associate Judge, concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

174 So. 3d 1128, 2015 Fla. App. LEXIS 14519, 2015 WL 5725600, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/eric-flite-v-medi-trans-inc-aka-mti-medi-trans-inc-aka-meditrans-fladistctapp-2015.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack