Harwood v. AMP, Inc.

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Harwood v. AMP, Inc.

516 So. 2d 66, 12 Fla. L. Weekly 2760, 1987 Fla. App. LEXIS 11323, 1987 WL 2133

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided December 2, 1987·No. No. 87-710·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We affirm the dismissal with prejudice of plaintiffs suit for breach of contract. We agree with the trial court that the complaint shows that the five year statute of limitations had expired because plaintiff had had notice more than five years before the suit was filed of the alleged breach. See Smith v. Continental Insurance Co., 326 So.2d 189, 191 (Fla. 2d DCA. 1976).

RYDER, A.C.J., LEHAN, J., and BOARDMAN, EDWARD F., (Ret.) J., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

We affirm the dismissal with prejudice of plaintiffs suit for breach of contract. We agree with the trial court that the complaint shows that the five year statute of limitations had expired because plaintiff had had notice more than five years before the suit was filed of the alleged breach. See Smith v. Continental Insurance Co., 326 So.2d 189, 191 (Fla. 2d DCA. 1976).

RYDER, A.C.J., LEHAN, J., and BOARDMAN, EDWARD F., (Ret.) J., concur.

Harwood v. AMP, Inc., 516 So. 2d 66, 12 Fla. L. Weekly 2760, 1987 Fla. App. LEXIS 11323, 1987 WL 2133 (Fla. Ct. App. 1987).

Pincite

516 So. 2d 66 (Harwood v. AMP, Inc.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related