Otis v. Wieder

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Otis v. Wieder

183 So. 2d 235, 1966 Fla. App. LEXIS 5508

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided February 1, 1966·No. No. 65-410·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The order of the trial judge dismissing appellant’s counterclaim, for failure to state a cause of action, is affirmed upon authority of Raphael v. Koretzky, Fla.App.1958, 102 So.2d 746. See also Weekley v. Knight, 116 Fla. 721, 156 So. 625 (1934); Suritz v. Kelner, Fla.App.1963, 155 So.2d 831; Campbell v. Magana, 184 Cal.App.2d 751, 8 Cal.Rptr. 32 (1960); and anno., 45 A.L.R.2d 5.

Appellant’s contention that she was deprived of an opportunity to amend her counterclaim is conclusively refuted by the record.

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

The order of the trial judge dismissing appellant’s counterclaim, for failure to state a cause of action, is affirmed upon authority of Raphael v. Koretzky, Fla.App.1958, 102 So.2d 746. See also Weekley v. Knight, 116 Fla. 721, 156 So. 625 (1934); Suritz v. Kelner, Fla.App.1963, 155 So.2d 831; Campbell v. Magana, 184 Cal.App.2d 751, 8 Cal.Rptr. 32 (1960); and anno., 45 A.L.R.2d 5.

Appellant’s contention that she was deprived of an opportunity to amend her counterclaim is conclusively refuted by the record.

Affirmed.

Otis v. Wieder, 183 So. 2d 235, 1966 Fla. App. LEXIS 5508 (Fla. Ct. App. 1966).

Pincite

183 So. 2d 235 (Otis v. Wieder) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related