Rumsey v. Dixon
This text of 365 So. 2d 226 (Rumsey v. Dixon) 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.
Opinion
The issue presented in this appeal is whether or not the trial court erred in dismissing appellant/plaintiff’s complaint for failure to state a cause of action without leave to amend.
We agree with the trial court’s order of dismissal and find that no harmful error has been demonstrated. Davies v. Canco Enterprises, 350 So.2d 23 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977); Adams v. Chenowith, 349 So.2d 230 (Fla. 4th DCA 1977); Cross-Aero Corporation v. Cross-Aero Service Corporation, 326 So.2d 249 (Fla. 3d DCA 1976). Accordingly the order appealed is affirmed.
Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
365 So. 2d 226, 1978 Fla. App. LEXIS 17123, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rumsey-v-dixon-fladistctapp-1978.