Olsen v. Bellsouth Telecommunications, Inc.

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Olsen v. Bellsouth Telecommunications, Inc.

662 So. 2d 425, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 11655, 1995 WL 654445

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedNovember 8, 1995

DocketNo. 94-2199

StatusPublished

This text of 662 So. 2d 425 (Olsen v. Bellsouth Telecommunications, 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

Olsen v. Bellsouth Telecommunications, Inc., 662 So. 2d 425, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 11655, 1995 WL 654445 (Fla. Ct. App. 1995).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from a final order of summary judgment on a complaint sounding in defamation. Appellants do not challenge the order granting summary judgment on the third amended complaint, but argue that the trial court should have granted leave to file a fourth amended complaint. We agree with appellants that the trial court abused its discretion in failing to grant them leave to file a fourth amended complaint where, as here, it appears that appellants may be able to better state a proper cause of action if allowed the opportunity. Hart Properties, Inc. v. Slack, 159 So.2d 236, 240 (Fla.1963); Sunday v. Balari, 542 So.2d 485 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989).

Accordingly, we affirm the order of summary judgment on the third amended complaint, but reverse the entry of final judgment. On remand we direct the trial court to allow appellants to file their fourth amended complaint.

REVERSED AND REMANDED.

GUNTHER, C.J., and POLEN and STEVENSON, 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 a final order of summary judgment on a complaint sounding in defamation. Appellants do not challenge the order granting summary judgment on the third amended complaint, but argue that the trial court should have granted leave to file a fourth amended complaint. We agree with appellants that the trial court abused its discretion in failing to grant them leave to file a fourth amended complaint where, as here, it appears that appellants may be able to better state a proper cause of action if allowed the opportunity. Hart Properties, Inc. v. Slack, 159 So.2d 236, 240 (Fla.1963); Sunday v. Balari, 542 So.2d 485 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989).

Accordingly, we affirm the order of summary judgment on the third amended complaint, but reverse the entry of final judgment. On remand we direct the trial court to allow appellants to file their fourth amended complaint.

REVERSED AND REMANDED.

GUNTHER, C.J., and POLEN and STEVENSON, JJ„ concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

662 So. 2d 425, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 11655, 1995 WL 654445, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/olsen-v-bellsouth-telecommunications-inc-fladistctapp-1995.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack