JUDD GILBERT, APPELLANT,
v.
OIL CONSERVATIONISTS, INC., BARRY PAUL AND PAUL V. DE BIANCHI, APPELLEES
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.
A Florida court reversed the dismissal of a corporate attorney from a shareholder's action seeking penalties for wrongful refusal to permit inspection of corporate books and records. The court held that the complaint adequately alleged the attorney's involvement and custody of the records, and that dismissal was premature before the defendant could assert affirmative defenses.
The court reversed the dismissal, holding that the complaint adequately alleged DeBianchi's status as attorney and authorized agent with custody of the records, satisfying the statutory terms. The court found dismissal premature because any affirmative defenses must first be pleaded by the defendant before the trial court can adjudicate them on a motion to dismiss.
[1] A motion to dismiss tests the legal sufficiency of a complaint, accepting all well-pleaded allegations as true.
[2] A corporate attorney who is also the authorized resident agent and has custody of corporate records may be subject to statutory penalties for refusing a shareholder's ins…
Previewing 2 of 4 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“Most obviously, the gaze of the trial court is limited to the four corners of the complaint, its allegations taken as true, when considering the merits of a motion to dismiss.”
Establishes the standard of review for motions to dismiss—courts must accept all well-pleaded allegations as true and cannot look beyond the complaint itself.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceJudd Gilbert, a qualified stockholder of Oil Conservationists, Inc., sought to examine the corporation's books and records pursuant to Florida Statute…
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 Proper Purpose For Inspection cases and more on FLexlaw
WALDEN, Judge.
Judd Gilbert, a qualified stockholder, sued Oil Conservationists, Inc., Barry Paul, the corporate president and sole director, and Paul V. DeBianchi, the corporate attorney, an authorized agent. Gilbert sought to examine the corporate books and records pursuant to Section 607.157(4), Florida Statutes (1983), and was refused by the three defendants. Gilbert then sought to impose the penalties prescribed by Section 607.157(5), Florida Statutes (1983).1 DeBi-anchi filed a motion to dismiss for failure to state a cause of action as to him. The motion was granted. Gilbert appeals. We reverse.
Most obviously, the gaze of the trial court is limited to the four corners of the complaint, its allegations taken as true, when considering the merits of a motion to dismiss. Green v. Savin, 455 So. 2d 494 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984).
Here the complaint alleged that DeBian-chi was the attorney for and authorized resident agent of the corporation. It further alleged that DeBianchi had custody of the various books and records in question.
We feel that the terms of the statute were adequately met by the complaint and that it was error to dismiss DeBianchi from the action. Padovano v. Wotitzky, 355 So. 2d 871 (Fla. 2d DCA 1978). Moreover, if DeBianchi has an affirmative defense, he may yet assert it and it would be premature for the trial court to adjudicate it on a motion to dismiss before it is pleaded.
Reversed.
HURLEY and DELL, JJ., concur. . Section 607.157(5) provides:
(5) Any officer or agent who, or corporation which, shall refuse to allow any such shareholder or holder of voting trust certificates or his agent or attorney so to examine and make extracts from its books and records of account, minutes, and record of shareholders for any proper purpose shall be liable to such shareholder or holder of voting trust certificates in a penalty of 10 percent of the value of the shares owned by such shareholder, or in respect of which such voting trust certificates are issued, in addition to any oth- - er damages or remedy afforded him by law. It shall be a defense to any action under this section that the person suing therefor has within 2 years sold or offered for sale any list of shareholders or of holders of voting trust certificates for shares of such corporation or any other corporation, has aided or abetted any person in procuring any list of sharehold- ' ers or of holders of voting trust certificates for any such purpose, has improperly used any information secured through any prior examination of the books and records of account, minutes, or record of shareholders or of holders of voting trust certificates for shares of such corporation or any other corporation, or was not acting in good faith or for a proper purpose in making his demand.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Gamma Dev. Corp. v. Steinberg, 621 So. 2d 718 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993)…. Leeson, 508 So. 2d 513 (Fla. 4th DCA 1987). The trial court should look only to the four corners of the pleading and the allegations should be taken as true without regard of ability of pleader to prove the same. Gilbert v. Oil Conservation, Inc., 460 So. 2d 1027 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984); Sovran Bank, N.A. v. Parsons, 547 So. 2d 1044 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989); Alexander, supra. Leave to amend should be liberally given and a dismissal with prejudice is not proper unless the privilege to amend has been abused, or it is…
-
OIL Conservationists, Inc. v. Judd Gilbert, 471 So. 2d 650 (Fla. 4th DCA 1985)
-
Almeroth v. Gov't Emps. Ins. Co., 537 So. 2d 717 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989)…PER CURIAM. We reverse the trial court’s final order dismissing the complaint with prejudice. See Gilbert v. Oil Conservationists, Inc., 460 So. 2d 1027 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984). GLICKSTEIN and GARRETT, JJ., and KAHN, MARTIN D., Associate Judge, concur.…
Authorities Cited
- Padovano v. Wotitzky, 355 So. 2d 871 (Fla. 2d DCA 1978)
- Karl W. Green, M.D. & Karl W. Green, M.D., P.A. v. Harry Savin, P.A., 455 So. 2d 494 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984)