JAMES C. LEWIS, JR., AS PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ESTATE OF JAMES C. LEWIS, DECEASED, APPELLANT,
v.
BARNETT BANK OF SOUTH FLORIDA, N.A., 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 reversed a dismissal order because the trial court improperly considered facts outside the complaint on a motion to dismiss, which is limited to well-pleaded allegations.
A motion to dismiss must be decided solely on well-pleaded facts within the four corners of the complaint and cannot consider extrinsic evidence, depositions, affidavits, or unpleaded affirmative defenses.
[1] On a motion to dismiss, a trial court is confined to well-pleaded facts in the complaint and may not consider extrinsic evidence, depositions, affidavits, or unpleaded af…
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 intelligenceThe plaintiff's personal representative filed a second amended complaint against Barnett Bank of South Florida, and the trial court dismissed it with …
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 Well-Pleaded Allegations cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
This is an appeal from a final order dismissing the plaintiffs second amended complaint with prejudice. Because (a) the trial court admittedly based its dismissal on facts outside the four corners of the complaint, and (b) the complainant otherwise pleads viable causes of action, the order under review is reversed and the cause is remanded to the trial court for further proceedings. The law is well settled that a motion to dismiss a complaint is not a motion for summary judgment in which the court may rely on facts adduced in depositions, affidavits, or other proofs. On a motion to dismiss, the trial court is necessarily confined to the well-pled facts alleged in the four corners of the complaint and contrary to the defendant’s argument, is not authorized to consider any other facts, including, as here, the sufficiency of the evidence which the plaintiff will likely produce at trial or other claimed facts asserted by defense counsel relating to un-pled affirmative defenses, even if argued by counsel for the parties on the motion to dismiss. We have not overlooked the various arguments advanced by the defendant herein, but are not persuaded thereby. Pizzi v. Central Bank & Trust Co., 250 So. 2d 895, 897 (Fla.1971); Parkway Gen. Hosp., Inc. v. Allstate Ins. Co., 393 So. 2d 1171, 1172 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981); Kest v. Nathanson, 216 So. 2d 233, 235 (Fla. 4th DCA 1968); Corbett v. Eastern Air Lines, Inc., 166 So. 2d 196, 203 (Fla. 1st DCA 1964); Carter v. National Auto. Ins. Co., 134 So. 2d 864, 865 (Fla. 1st DCA 1961); Stone v. Stone, 97 So. 2d 352, 354 (Fla. 3d DCA 1957).
Reversed and remanded.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (18 total)
-
DOE v. Evans, 814 So. 2d 370 (Fla. 2002)…be barred by First Amendment, but holding only that Illinois does not recognize claim of breach of fiduciary duty based upon relationship between cleric and parishioner because religion is the foundation of the claim). . See Lewis v. Barnett Bank, 604 So. 2d 937 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992) ("On a motion to dismiss, the trial court is necessarily confined to the well-pled facts alleged in the four corners of the complaint.... ”); see also Jordan v. Griley, 667 So. 2d 493 (Fla. 3d DCA 1996). . Federal courts: Dausch…
-
Holland v. Anheuser Busch, Inc., 643 So. 2d 621 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994)…vidence in the form of the affidavits in determining that Anheuser did not have such an interest and thus could not be sued by Holland. Fish v. Post of Amvets # 85, 560 So. 2d 337 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990). See also Lewis v. Barnett Bank of South Florida, 604 So. 2d 937, 938 (Fla, 3d DCA 1992) (“The law is well settled that a motion to dismiss a complaint is not a motion for summary judgment in which the court may rely on facts adduced in depositions, affidavits, or other proofs.”) Although the trial court may ulti…
-
Halsey Minor & Save Hialeah Racing, Inc. v. Brunetti, 43 So. 3d 178 (Fla. 3d DCA 2010)…v. Porto Vita, Ltd., 954 So. 2d 1240, 1242 (Fla. 3d DCA 2007). The trial court may not rely on facts offered in depositions, affidavits, or other proofs. See Jordan v. Griley, 667 So. 2d 493 (Fla. 3d DCA 1996); Lewis v. Barnett Bank of S. Fla. N.A., 604 So. 2d 937 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992). Rather, the trial court is confined to the facts alleged within the four corners of the complaint. See Chodorow, 954 So. 2d at 1242. All such allegations must be taken as true and any reasonable inferences drawn from the complain…
Previewing 3 of 18 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Pizzi v. Cent. Bank & Tr. Co., 250 So. 2d 895 (Fla. 1971)
- Stone v. Stone, 97 So. 2d 352 (Fla. 3d DCA 1957)
- Kest v. Nathanson, 216 So. 2d 233 (Fla. 4th DCA 1968)
- Parkway Gen. Hosp., Inc. v. Allstate Ins. Co., 393 So. 2d 1171 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981)
- Corbett v. E. AIR Lines, Inc., 166 So. 2d 196 (Fla. 1st DCA 1964)
- Carter v. Nat'l Auto. Ins. Co., 134 So. 2d 864 (Fla. 1st DCA 1961)