Palma v. Zerbey

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Palma v. Zerbey

189 So. 2d 510

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJuly 26, 1966

Docket66-4

StatusPublished

Cited by11 cases

This text of 189 So. 2d 510 (Palma v. Zerbey) 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

Palma v. Zerbey, 189 So. 2d 510 (Fla. Ct. App. 1966).

Pincite

Opinion

189 So.2d 510 (1966)

Salvatore V. PALMA, for Use and Benefit of Golden Palms, Inc., a Florida Corporation, Appellant,
v.
John M. ZERBEY, Appellee.

No. 66-4.

District Court of Appeal of Florida. Third District.

July 26, 1966. Rehearing Denied September 13, 1966.

Taylor, Brion, Buker, Hames & Greene and Robert J. Paterno, Miami, for appellant.

Robertson, McLeod & Maloy, Coral Gables, for appellee.

Before HENDRY, C.J., and PEARSON and BARKDULL, JJ.

*511 PER CURIAM.

By this appeal we are called upon to review a final order of dismissal of an amended complaint, after the plaintiff had declined to amend further. We affirm.

It is apparent that the action attempted to be pleaded was in the nature of a stockholder's derivative action on behalf of a corporation. We fail to find sufficient allegations in the complaint to indicate both wrongful acts and damage to the corporation. See: James Talcott, Inc. v. McDowell, Fla.App. 1962, 148 So.2d 36; Maronek v. Atlantis Hotel, Inc., Fla.App. 1963, 148 So.2d 721; Citizens National Bank of St. Petersburg v. Peters, Fla.App. 1965, 175 So.2d 54.

Affirmed.

PEARSON, J., dissents.

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

189 So.2d 510 (1966)

Salvatore V. PALMA, for Use and Benefit of Golden Palms, Inc., a Florida Corporation, Appellant,
v.
John M. ZERBEY, Appellee.

No. 66-4.

District Court of Appeal of Florida. Third District.

July 26, 1966. Rehearing Denied September 13, 1966.

Taylor, Brion, Buker, Hames & Greene and Robert J. Paterno, Miami, for appellant.

Robertson, McLeod & Maloy, Coral Gables, for appellee.

Before HENDRY, C.J., and PEARSON and BARKDULL, JJ.

*511 PER CURIAM.

By this appeal we are called upon to review a final order of dismissal of an amended complaint, after the plaintiff had declined to amend further. We affirm.

It is apparent that the action attempted to be pleaded was in the nature of a stockholder's derivative action on behalf of a corporation. We fail to find sufficient allegations in the complaint to indicate both wrongful acts and damage to the corporation. See: James Talcott, Inc. v. McDowell, Fla.App. 1962, 148 So.2d 36; Maronek v. Atlantis Hotel, Inc., Fla.App. 1963, 148 So.2d 721; Citizens National Bank of St. Petersburg v. Peters, Fla.App. 1965, 175 So.2d 54.

Affirmed.

PEARSON, J., dissents.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

189 So. 2d 510, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/palma-v-zerbey-fladistctapp-1966.

Opinion

Salvatore V. PALMA, for Use and Benefit of Golden Palms, Inc., a Florida Corporation, Appellant, v. John M. ZERBEY, Appellee.

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Salvatore V. PALMA, for Use and Benefit of Golden Palms, Inc., a Florida Corporation, Appellant,
v.
John M. ZERBEY, Appellee.