CHARITE EMILE, APPELLANT,
v.
FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The court held that the amended complaint contained sufficient allegations of fact which, if proved, stated a cause of action for negligence.
Appellant sued appellee Florida Power & Light (FP&L) after a fire damaged his restaurant. FP&L had shut off power for non-payment and reconnected it w…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Motion To Dismiss Standard cases and more on FLexlaw
HENDRY, Judge.
The order dismissing appellant’s amended complaint for failure to state a cause of action is reversed and the action reinstated.
In ruling on a motion to dismiss, the trial court is confined to the allegations within the four corners of the complaint, Pizzi v. Central Bank and Trust Co., 250 So. 2d 895, 897 (Fla.1971); Airport Sign Corp. v. Dade County, 400 So. 2d 828 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981), and cases cited, must accept these allegations as true, Orlando Sports Stadium, Inc. v. State ex rel. Powell, 262 So. 2d 881 (Fla.1972), and may not speculate as to what the true facts may be or what facts may ultimately be proved in the trial of the cause. Dunnell v. Malone and Hyde, Inc., 425 So. 2d 646 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983).
We conclude that the amended complaint contained sufficient allegations of fact which, if ultimately proved, stated a cause of action affording relief. The amended complaint, sounding in negligence, properly alleged that the appellee, Florida Power & Light, knew or should have known that appellant would be unaware of the return of electrical service to his restaurant since FP & L had previously notified him of the power shut-off for failure to pay the delinquent bill for electrical service and then reconnected the wires without warning him of the power return, and that as a direct and proximate result of FP & L’s negligence a fire causing extensive damage to appellant’s restaurant occurred. See Simon v. Tampa Electric Co., 202 So. 2d 209 (Fla. 2d DCA 1967); Ahearn v. Florida Power and Light Co., 129 So. 2d 457 (Fla. 2d DCA), cert. denied, 135 So. 2d 741 (Fla.1961); cf. White v. Orlando Utilities Commission, 156 So. 2d 879 (Fla. 2d DCA 1963).
Without passing on the merits of appellant’s claim, we hold that the complaint stated a valid cause of action. Accordingly, the amended complaint is reinstated and the cause remanded for further proceedings not inconsistent with this opinion.
Reversed and remanded.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Fausto Lopez-Infante v. Union Cent. Life Ins. Co., 809 So. 2d 13 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002)…tions within the four corners of the Complaint, must accept these allegations as true, and may not speculate as to what the true facts may be or what facts may ultimately be proved in the trial of the cause. See Emile v. Florida Power and Light Co., 426 So. 2d 1152 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983). According to Section 95.11(3)(j), Florida Statutes, the statute of limitations for a fraud action is four years. In computing that four year time frame, Section 95.031(2)(a), Florida Statutes, explains: An action for fraud under…
-
Maillard v. Dowdell, 528 So. 2d 512 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988)…egations found within the four corners of the complaint and must accept these allegations as true. Copeland v. Celotex Corp., 447 So. 2d 908 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984), quashed on other grounds, 471 So. 2d 533 (Fla.1985); Emile v. Florida Power & Light Co., 426 So. 2d 1152 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983); Dunnell v. Malone & Hyde, Inc., 425 So. 2d 646 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983). The fundamental question a court must consider in ruling on a motion to dismiss is whether by proving the allegations in the complaint the plaintiff would establi…
-
Copeland v. The Celotex Corp., 447 So. 2d 908 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984)…failure to state a cause of action a court is strictly confined in its consideration to the allegations found within the four corners of the complaint. Pizzi v. Central Bank & Trust Co., 250 So. 2d 895 (Fla.1971); Emile v. Florida Power & Light Co., 426 So. 2d 1152 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983); Dunnell v. Malone & Hyde, Inc., 425 So. 2d 646 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983). A motion to dismiss is not a substitute for a motion for summary judgment. Dunnell; see Pizzi. All allegations in the complaint must be accepted as true, Emile; D…
Previewing 3 of 8 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Orlando Sports Stadium, Inc. v. The State of Fla. ex rel. Rom W. Powell, 262 So. 2d 881 (Fla. 1972)
- Pizzi v. Cent. Bank & Tr. Co., 250 So. 2d 895 (Fla. 1971)
- Simon v. Tampa Elec. Co., 202 So. 2d 209 (Fla. 2d DCA 1967)
- Ahearn v. Fla. Power & Light Co., 129 So. 2d 457 (Fla. 2d DCA 1961)
- Airport Sign Corp. v. Dade Cnty. & Richard Judy, 400 So. 2d 828 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981)
- White v. Orlando Utils. Comm'n, 156 So. 2d 879 (Fla. 2d DCA 1963)
- Rappaport v. Finesod, 425 So. 2d 646 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983)
- Dunnell v. Malone & Hyde, Inc., 425 So. 2d 646 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983)
- Miami Herald Publ'g Co. v. Brautigam, 135 So. 2d 741 (Fla. 1961)
- Fla. Power & Light Co. v. Ahearn, 135 So. 2d 741 (Fla. 1961)