Lisenbee v. Whitman
252 So. 3d 1280
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided August 17, 2018·No. Case No. 5D18-396·Published·Cited by 1 cases
Opinion
The trial court properly dismissed Appellant's amended complaint with prejudice. The applicable statute of limitations had run, and Appellant admittedly failed to comply or plead compliance with the mandatory presuit investigation and notice requirements set forth in chapter 766, Florida Statutes.
AFFIRMED.
ORFINGER, EVANDER and EDWARDS, JJ., concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Lisenbee v. Whitman, 252 So. 3d 1280 (Fla. Ct. App. 2018).
252 So. 3d 1280 (Lisenbee v. Whitman) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Ghamra, M. D., Lung Associates of Sarasota, LLC v. Williams, Estate of Derrick Williams
District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2025