Pomeroy v. Southern Bell Telephone & Telegraph Co.

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Pomeroy v. Southern Bell Telephone & Telegraph Co.

410 So. 2d 647, 1982 Fla. App. LEXIS 19418

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMarch 9, 1982

DocketNo. 80-1809

StatusPublished

This text of 410 So. 2d 647 (Pomeroy v. Southern Bell Telephone & Telegraph Co.) 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

Pomeroy v. Southern Bell Telephone & Telegraph Co., 410 So. 2d 647, 1982 Fla. App. LEXIS 19418 (Fla. Ct. App. 1982).

Pincite

Opinion

SCHWARTZ, Judge.

Stung by successive recommendations by a Dade County evaluation team headed by Thomas Pomeroy against the company’s bids on various projects, Joel Ware, a Southern Bell vice-president, wrote to Pom-eroy’s superior — with copies to the county manager and another county official— which, in essence, complained that he had “grossly biased” the evaluations against Southern Bell.¹ The trial court dismissed Pomeroy’s complaint against Ware and Southern Bell, based on the letter, with prejudice. In our view, the allegedly defamatory statements sued upon were no more than expressions of opinion and were therefore properly determined to be non-actionable as a matter of law. From v. Tallahassee Democrat, Inc., 400 So.2d 52 (Fla.1st DCA 1981); Palm Beach Newspapers, Inc. v. Early, 334 So.2d 50 (Fla.4th DCA 1976), appeal dismissed, cert. denied, 354 So.2d 351 (Fla.1977), cert. denied, 439 U.S. 910, 99 S.Ct. 277, 58 L.Ed.2d 255 (1978).

Affirmed.

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

SCHWARTZ, Judge.

Stung by successive recommendations by a Dade County evaluation team headed by Thomas Pomeroy against the company’s bids on various projects, Joel Ware, a Southern Bell vice-president, wrote to Pom-eroy’s superior — with copies to the county manager and another county official— which, in essence, complained that he had “grossly biased” the evaluations against Southern Bell.¹ The trial court dismissed Pomeroy’s complaint against Ware and Southern Bell, based on the letter, with prejudice. In our view, the allegedly defamatory statements sued upon were no more than expressions of opinion and were therefore properly determined to be non-actionable as a matter of law. From v. Tallahassee Democrat, Inc., 400 So.2d 52 (Fla.1st DCA 1981); Palm Beach Newspapers, Inc. v. Early, 334 So.2d 50 (Fla.4th DCA 1976), appeal dismissed, cert. denied, 354 So.2d 351 (Fla.1977), cert. denied, 439 U.S. 910, 99 S.Ct. 277, 58 L.Ed.2d 255 (1978).

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

410 So. 2d 647, 1982 Fla. App. LEXIS 19418, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/pomeroy-v-southern-bell-telephone-telegraph-co-fladistctapp-1982.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack