GEORGE W. DUBREUIL, APPELLANT,
v.
JAMES J. JAMES, APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Permissive Counterclaim cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
The appellant, defendant in the trial court, appeals a judgment dismissing his counterclaim without leave to amend. Defendant was sued by the plaintiff-appellee for alleged fraud in a stock purchase agreement. Defendant attempted to set up a counterclaim in which he alleged that a promissory note he had previously paid to the plaintiff was made and paid under duress. The trial court dismissed the counterclaim upon the plaintiff’s motion which relied upon the applicable statute of limitations. Inasmuch as it affirmatively appears from the pleadings that the attempted counterclaim is permissive and not compulsory, see Barrett v. Pickard, 85 So. 2d 630 (Fla.1956); McDonald Air Conditioning v. 1041 Corporation, 251 So. 2d 319 (Fla. 1st DCA 1971); and Florida Rules of Civil Procedure 1.170(b), and that the time specified by the statute of limitations, Section 95.11, Florida Statutes (1973), had run, the judgment is affirmed.
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Smith v. Fla. Dep't OF Corr., 27 So. 3d 124 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010)…ions will not bar the filing of a compulsory counterclaim, see Allie v. Ionata, 503 So. 2d 1237 (Fla.1987), but it is well-settled that a permissive counterclaim will be barred if it is filed beyond the statute of limitations. See DuBreuil v. James, 365 So. 2d 184 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978). In an effort to avoid the application of the statute of limitations to bar its counterclaim, DOC argued that a cause of action under section 960.297(1) does not accrue until the offender is released from prison, and because Appe…
-
Wichmann v. Conrad & Scherer, LLP, 237 So. 3d 1018 (Fla. 4th DCA 2018)
Authorities Cited
- Barrett v. Pickard, 85 So. 2d 630 (Fla. 1956)
- McDonald Air Conditioning v. 1041 Corp., Inc., 251 So. 2d 319 (Fla. 1st DCA 1971)