OSCAR A. MEYER, APPELLANT,
v.
ANNA D. MEYER AND THE MONSANTO COMPANY EMPLOYEE BENEFITS PLANS COMMITTEE, 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.
The court affirmed dismissal for failure to state a cause of action but reversed dismissal based on res judicata and collateral estoppel, remanding for further proceedings.
A complaint may be dismissed for failure to state a cause of action, but dismissal on res judicata and collateral estoppel grounds requires reversal when the record does not support those defenses.
[1] Dismissal on res judicata and collateral estoppel grounds may be reversed when the trial court's application of these defenses is not supported by the record.
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceOscar Meyer appealed a judgment dismissing his complaint against Monsanto Company Employee Benefits Plans Committee after the trial court granted moti…
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 Mental Anguish Damages cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
This cause is before us on appeal from a final judgment entered in favor of Monsanto Company Employee Benefits Plans Committee after an order dismissing appellant’s complaint. The order dismissing the complaint states in pertinent part:
IT IS ORDERED and ADJUDGED:
1. Monsanto’s motion to strike the claim for punitive damages is granted.
2. Monsanto’s motion to strike the claim for mental anguish is granted.
3. Monsanto’s motion to dismiss the complaint for failure to state a cause of action is granted.
4. Monsanto’s motion to dismiss the complaint, with prejudice, on the basis of res judicata and collateral estoppel is granted with prejudice.
Appellant contends that (1) the trial court erred in granting the motion to dismiss for failure to state a cause of action, and (2) the trial court erred in granting the motion to dismiss on the basis of res judicata and collateral estoppel. We affirm without discussion the trial court’s order dismissing the complaint for failure to state a cause of action. However, we must reverse the trial court’s order dismissing the complaint on res judicata and collateral estoppel grounds. See Pfeiffer v. Roux Laboratories, Inc., 547 So. 2d 1271 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989), and Daniel International Corporation v. Better Construction, Inc., 593 So. 2d 524 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991).
Accordingly, the order is affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded for proceedings consistent herewith.
BOOTH, SHIVERS and MINER, JJ„ concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Pfeiffer v. Roux Labs., Inc., 547 So. 2d 1271 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989)
- Daniel Int'l Corp. v. Better Constr., Inc., 593 So. 2d 524 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991)