VON D. MIZELL, APPELLANT,
v.
NORTH BROWARD HOSPITAL DISTRICT ET AL., APPELLEES

5th Cir. | 1968-03-27
No. 25132
392 F.2d 580 Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit (1968) Positive Treatment
Cited by 20 cases

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.


Holding

The dismissal of the complaint for failure to state a claim is reversed because the allegations, tested under the appropriate standard, do not demonstrate beyond doubt that the plaintiff can prove no set of facts entitling him to relief.


Facts & Procedural History

Appellant sued a hospital district and doctors under the Civil Rights Act for alleged violations of constitutional rights when his surgical privileges…

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.


Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM:

PER CURIAM:

This case is a continuation of a controversy that has raged for years in the state courts of Florida.1 Shifting the battleground to the federal courts, Appellant Mizell filed a complaint in the District Court under the Civil Rights Act of 1871, 42 U.S.C.A. §§ 1981, 1985, 28 U.S.C.A. §§ 1343(3), 1343(4), alleging a violation of his constitutional rights by defendant Hospital District and certain doctors in Broward County who practiced at the hospital when Appellant’s surgical privileges were suspended in 1961 and reinstatement was denied when formally sought in 1966. The Trial Judge dismissed the complaint for failure to state a claim upon which relief could be granted. F.R.Civ.P. 12(b).

Testing the allegations in the complaint under the rule of Conley v. Gibson, 1957, 355 U.S. 41, 78 S.Ct. 99, 2 L.Ed.2d 80;

Barber v. Motor Vessel “Blue Cat,” 5 Cir., 1967, 372 F. 2d 626; and Bobby Jones Garden Apartments, Inc. v. Suleski, 5 Cir., 1968, 391 F. 2d 172, we hold that the dismissal cannot be sustained. Thus it becomes unnecessary to discuss further either the claims (1961, 1966 or any or all of either or both) or the validity of myriad defenses raised by the defendants, such as res judicata and collateral estoppel. As to none of these do we suggest even the slightest whisper of a possible opinion or a prejudgment. These matters are for the initial consideration of the Trial Judge. See Shelkofsky v. Broughton, 5 Cir., 1968, 388 F. 2d 977 and the numerous cases cited therein.

Reversed and remanded.

. See Mizell v. North Broward Hosp. Dist., Fla.Ct.App., 1965, 175 So. 2d 583; North Broward Hosp. Dist. v. Mizell, Fla., 1962, 148 So. 2d 1.

. “[A] complaint should not be dismissed for failure to state a claim unless it appears beyond doubt that the plaintiff can prove no set of facts in support of his claim which would entitle him to relief.” 355 U.S. at 45-46, 78 S.Ct. at 102, 2 L.Ed.2d at 84.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

Previewing 3 of 10 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw