Rumsey v. Dixon
365 So. 2d 226, 1978 Fla. App. LEXIS 17123
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
Rumsey v. Dixon, 365 So. 2d 226, 1978 Fla. App. LEXIS 17123 (Fla. Ct. App. 1978).
365 So. 2d 226 (Rumsey v. Dixon) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Adams v. Chenowith
349 So. 2d 230 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1977)
Cross-Aero Corp. v. Cross-Aero Service Corp.
326 So. 2d 249 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1976)
Davies v. Canco Enterprises
350 So. 2d 23 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1977)