ROSE LEVINE AND DORIS LEVINE,

v.

JOHN I. ROBINSON, AS EXECUTOR OF THE ESTATE OF DAVID NISSENBAUM, DECEASED

Citator

Cited By

• Tyson v. Viacom, Inc., 890 So. 2d 1205 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005)
  …Parc Royale E. Dev., Inc., 861 So. 2d 74, 76 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003)(same); Gold v. Bankier, 840 So. 2d 395, 397 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003)(quoting Cole v. First Dev. Corp. of Am., 339 So. 2d 1130, 1131 (Fla. 2d DCA 1976)(citing Gordon v. Gordon, 160 Fla. 838, 36 So. 2d 774 (1948)))(“ ‘Identity of the causes of action is established where the facts which are required to maintain both actions are identical.’ ”)(emphasis added). In Tyson’s case, the facts necessary to prove his three claims were'not identical. For purpo…

  ← 1 / 2 →
• Cole v. First Dev. Corp. OF Am., 339 So. 2d 1130 (Fla. 2d DCA 1976)
  …gainst whom the claim is made. E. g., Matthews v. Matthews, 133 So. 2d 91 (Fla. 2d DCA 1961). Identity of the causes of action is established where the facts which are required to maintain both actions are identical. Gordon v. Gordon, 160 Fla. 838, 36 So. 2d 774 (1948). In the case before us the facts necessary to allege and prove the fraud and deceit action are contradictory to those necessary to sustain the contract action. This obvious difference between the facts essential to each of these two causes of…
• Smith v. Fla. E. Coast Ry. Co., 151 So. 2d 70 (Fla. 3d DCA 1963)
  …cata, the test of the identity of the causes of action is the identity of the facts essential to the maintenance of the actions. Poe v. State Road Department, Fla.App.1961, 127 So. 2d 898; Youngblood v. Taylor, supra; Gordon v. Gordon, 160 Fla. 838, 36 So. 2d 774, 4 A.L.R. 2d 102. Reverting to the case at bar, the doctrine of res judicata would not apply to bar the appellant’s action because the two causes of action differ substantially with regard to certain of the facts necessary to their maintenance. Nor…