JOHN V. HEAD, APPELLANT,
v.
FRATERNAL ORDER OF POLICE LODGE # 25, INC., ET AL., APPELLEE
JOHN V. HEAD, APPELLANT,
FRATERNAL ORDER OF POLICE LODGE # 25, INC., ET AL., APPELLEE
911 So. 2d 125
Florida District Court of Appeal, Fifth District (2005)
Positive Treatment
Cited by 7 cases
Opinion of the Court
BY ORDER OF THE COURT:
ORDERED that Appellant’s MOTION TO SET ASIDE OR VACATE ORDER, filed March 1, 2005, is granted. Accordingly, the February 15, 2005, Per Curiam Decision of this Court is vacated and withdrawn. Further, Appellant’s February 14, 2005, Reply Brief shall be considered by this Court. Appellant’s request for oral argument and to assign a different panel to the appeal is denied.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Rolle v. Cold Stone Creamery, Inc., 212 So. 3d 1073 (Fla. 3d DCA 2017)…d 736, 736 (Fla. 3d DCA 1971); see also K.R. Exch. Servs., Inc. v. Fuerst, Humphrey, Ittleman, PL, 48 So. 3d 889, 894 (Fla. 3d DCA 2010); Blue Supply Corp. v. Novos Electro Mech., Inc., 990 So. 2d 1157, 1159 (Fla. 3d DCA 2008); Merovich v. Huzenman, 911 So. 2d 125, 128 n.5 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005). Affirmative defenses are generally matters raised in an answer and not a motion to dismiss. Grove Isle, 137 So. 3d at 1089. “However, where the facts constituting the defense affirmatively appear on the face of the comp…
-
Dougan v. Ric L. Bradshaw, 198 So. 3d 878 (Fla. 4th DCA 2016)…junction preventing the Sheriff from enforcing its policy. Upon motion by the Sheriff, the court dismissed Appellant’s lawsuit with prejudice.2 This appeal follows. Analysis Appellate courts review a dismissal order de-novo. Merovich v. Huzenman, 911 So. 2d 125, 127 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005). When considering a motion to dismiss for failure to state a cause of action, the court must take the allegations of the complaint as true and, based on the facts as pled, determine whether the complaint can pass legal muster…
-
Picture it Sold Photography, LLC v. Bunkelman, 287 So. 3d 699 (Fla. 4th DCA 2020)…sentations. “Without justifiable reliance, there can be no actionable fraud.” Hillcrest, 727 So. 2d at 1057. In addition, as Employer argues, the evidence established a waiver of any claim of fraud in the inducement. See Merovich v. Huzenman, 911 So. 2d 125, 127 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005) (“Execution of a contract with knowledge that an initial agreement was fraudulently procured constitutes a waiver of claims based on the previous fraud.”). Conclusion Accordingly, we determine that the trial court er…
Previewing 3 of 7 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence