RAUL F. VERGARA, APPELLANT,
v.
STEPHEN H. BUTTER, APPELLEE
RAUL F. VERGARA, APPELLANT,
STEPHEN H. BUTTER, APPELLEE
568 So. 2d 976
Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (1990)
Caution
Cited by 6 cases
Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.
Raul Vergara, plaintiff below, appeals a final order dismissing his second amended complaint with prejudice. After review of the briefs and record herein, we concur with the trial court that the second amended complaint did not state a cause of action, see Nickolauson v. Rhyne, 529 So. 2d 365 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988), and that if any cause of action did exist, it would be barred by the statute of limitations. See § 95.11(4), Fla.Stat. (1989). The order under review is therefore affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Dewayne Fripp v. State, 766 So. 2d 252 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000)…to object but specifically stated that he had no objection to the admission” of the evidence. Id. at 1030; see Robertson v. State, 94 Fla. 770, 774-75, 114 So. 534, 536 (1927); Henley v. State, 719 So. 2d 990 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998); Duperier v. State, 568 So. 2d 976 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990). Addressing the merits, we reject Fripp’s contention that the officer did not have the authority to arrest him on the driver’s license charge. A violation of section 322.03(1) is a second degree misdemeanor. See § 322.39, Fla. S…
-
Jaggers v. State, 588 So. 2d 613 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991)…he three children. Although he objected thereto at pretrial, he failed to renew the objection during the retrial. Correll v. State, 523 So. 2d 562, 566 (Fla.), cert. denied, 488 U.S. 871, 109 S.Ct. 183, 102 L.Ed.2d 152 (1988). Cf. Duperier v. State, 568 So. 2d 976 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990) (appellate review waived when defendant moved to suppress physical evidence before trial but failed to object at trial to the introduction of that evidence). Nonetheless, since we are ordering a further retrial, we express our co…
-
Manolo Perez v. State, 851 So. 2d 849 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003)…the admission of the drugs into evidence, thereby failing to preserve the issue for appellate review. That failure possibly could constitute ineffective assistance of counsel. Jackson v. State, 711 So. 2d 1371 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998); Duperier v. State, 568 So. 2d 976 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990). It appears that Perez may have been prejudiced by his counsel’s failure to preserve the issue for appellate review because the facts alleged demonstrate that the drugs were discovered pursuant to an illegal search and served as…
Authorities Cited
- Nickolauson v. Rhyne, 529 So. 2d 365 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988)