Radaker v. Houston, Cooper, Shahady & Frazier, P.A.

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Radaker v. Houston, Cooper, Shahady & Frazier, P.A.

608 So. 2d 940, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 12085, 1992 WL 353168

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedDecember 2, 1992

DocketNo. 91-3596

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 608 So. 2d 940 (Radaker v. Houston, Cooper, Shahady & Frazier, P.A.) 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

Radaker v. Houston, Cooper, Shahady & Frazier, P.A., 608 So. 2d 940, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 12085, 1992 WL 353168 (Fla. Ct. App. 1992).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellant in his second amended verified complaint alleged claims for legal malpractice, breach of fiduciary duty and civil conspiracy. He appeals from the trial court’s order of dismissal with prejudice. We affirm the trial court’s dismissal of these counts for failure to state causes of action. See Romans v. Warm Mineral Springs, Inc., 155 So.2d 183 (Fla. 2d DCA1963); Roger Lee, Inc. v. Trend Mills, Inc., 410 F.2d 928 (5th Cir.1969). However, based upon the trial court’s earlier order denying appellees’ motion to dismiss appellant’s [941]*941amended verified complaint, we hold the trial court abused its discretion when it dismissed appellee’s second amended verified complaint with prejudice. Accordingly, we reverse the trial court’s order of dismissal with prejudice and remand this cause to the trial court with instructions to allow appellant leave to amend his complaint.

AFFIRMED IN PART, REVERSED IN PART and REMANDED with instructions consistent herewith.

GLICKSTEIN, C.J., and DELL and STONE, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

Appellant in his second amended verified complaint alleged claims for legal malpractice, breach of fiduciary duty and civil conspiracy. He appeals from the trial court’s order of dismissal with prejudice. We affirm the trial court’s dismissal of these counts for failure to state causes of action. See Romans v. Warm Mineral Springs, Inc., 155 So.2d 183 (Fla. 2d DCA1963); Roger Lee, Inc. v. Trend Mills, Inc., 410 F.2d 928 (5th Cir.1969). However, based upon the trial court’s earlier order denying appellees’ motion to dismiss appellant’s [941]*941amended verified complaint, we hold the trial court abused its discretion when it dismissed appellee’s second amended verified complaint with prejudice. Accordingly, we reverse the trial court’s order of dismissal with prejudice and remand this cause to the trial court with instructions to allow appellant leave to amend his complaint.

AFFIRMED IN PART, REVERSED IN PART and REMANDED with instructions consistent herewith.

GLICKSTEIN, C.J., and DELL and STONE, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

608 So. 2d 940, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 12085, 1992 WL 353168, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/radaker-v-houston-cooper-shahady-frazier-pa-fladistctapp-1992.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack