Vereen v. Alpha Realty & Associates, Inc.

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Vereen v. Alpha Realty & Associates, Inc.

846 So. 2d 1161, 2003 Fla. App. LEXIS 5818, 2003 WL 1936138

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedApril 25, 2003

DocketNo. 5D02-131

StatusPublished

This text of 846 So. 2d 1161 (Vereen v. Alpha Realty & Associates, Inc.) 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

Vereen v. Alpha Realty & Associates, Inc., 846 So. 2d 1161, 2003 Fla. App. LEXIS 5818, 2003 WL 1936138 (Fla. Ct. App. 2003).

Pincite

Opinion

THOMPSON, C.J.

Grayling L. Vereen, pro se, appeals a final summary judgment in favor of Alpha Realty & Associates, Inc.

We affirm the summary judgment because Vereen has not shown that Alpha was required to file a compulsory counterclaim in order to oppose Vereen’s claim that he was entitled to the return of his $200.00 security deposit. As the appellant, Vereen has the burden to demonstrate error. Walker v. New Smyrna Beach Police Department, 834 So.2d 277 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002).

We agree with Alpha on the second point, that Vereen abandoned his negligence claim when he failed to include it in his amended complaint. See State Farm Fire and Casualty Co. v. Higgins, 788 So.2d 992, 995 (Fla. 4th DCA) (an amended complaint that does not express an intention to save an earlier pleading supersedes the earlier pleading), rev. granted, [1162]*1162794 So.2d 604 (Fla.2001); Steele v. Lannon, 355 So.2d 190 n. 1 (Fla. 2d DCA 1978) (generally, an amended complaint, as opposed to an amendment to a complaint, that does not refer to the original complaint, supersedes the original complaint) (citing Dee v. Southern Brewing Co., 146 Fla. 588, 1 So.2d 562, 562-563 (1941) (filing amended complaint abandons original complaint, which no longer serves any purpose on the record)).

AFFIRMED.

GRIFFIN, J., concurs. SAWAYA, J., concurs in result only.

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

THOMPSON, C.J.

Grayling L. Vereen, pro se, appeals a final summary judgment in favor of Alpha Realty & Associates, Inc.

We affirm the summary judgment because Vereen has not shown that Alpha was required to file a compulsory counterclaim in order to oppose Vereen’s claim that he was entitled to the return of his $200.00 security deposit. As the appellant, Vereen has the burden to demonstrate error. Walker v. New Smyrna Beach Police Department, 834 So.2d 277 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002).

We agree with Alpha on the second point, that Vereen abandoned his negligence claim when he failed to include it in his amended complaint. See State Farm Fire and Casualty Co. v. Higgins, 788 So.2d 992, 995 (Fla. 4th DCA) (an amended complaint that does not express an intention to save an earlier pleading supersedes the earlier pleading), rev. granted, [1162]*1162794 So.2d 604 (Fla.2001); Steele v. Lannon, 355 So.2d 190 n. 1 (Fla. 2d DCA 1978) (generally, an amended complaint, as opposed to an amendment to a complaint, that does not refer to the original complaint, supersedes the original complaint) (citing Dee v. Southern Brewing Co., 146 Fla. 588, 1 So.2d 562, 562-563 (1941) (filing amended complaint abandons original complaint, which no longer serves any purpose on the record)).

AFFIRMED.

GRIFFIN, J., concurs. SAWAYA, J., concurs in result only.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

846 So. 2d 1161, 2003 Fla. App. LEXIS 5818, 2003 WL 1936138, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/vereen-v-alpha-realty-associates-inc-fladistctapp-2003.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack