GEOFFREY C.F. MAY, APPELLANT,
v.
JAMES D. SALTER, AS FORMER TRUSTEE OF THE JACK C. MAY TRUST, AND CHARLES W. LITTELL, AS TRUSTEE OF THE JACK C. MAY TRUST, 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 trust beneficiary appealed the dismissal of his complaint challenging a former trustee's Final Accounting on res judicata grounds. The court held that while certain breach claims were properly dismissed as previously litigated, the claims specifically challenging deficiencies in the Final Accounting were not barred because the accounting was completed after the prior litigation.
The court reversed the dismissal of Count I claims alleging deficiencies in the Final Accounting because those specific claims could not have been previously litigated since the Final Accounting was completed after the prior amended complaint was filed. The court affirmed the dismissal of allegations 12g, 12h, 12i of Count I and Count II because those breach claims had already been litigated.
[1] A motion to dismiss is generally limited to the four corners of the complaint and attachments, and affirmative defenses are typically not considered unless their merit is…
[2] A claim is not barred by res judicata if the specific allegations of deficiency in a trustee's final accounting were not litigated in prior proceedings and the accounting…
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“Typically affirmative defenses, like res judicata in this case, cannot be properly considered on a motion to dismiss.”
Establishes the general rule that res judicata cannot be decided on a motion to dismiss unless conclusively demonstrated on the complaint's face
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceGeoffrey May, a trust beneficiary, filed a complaint challenging the Final Accounting of the Jack C. May Trust prepared by former trustee James Salter…
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 Final Accounting cases and more on FLexlaw
This appeal challenges an order dismissing the complaint of a trust beneficiary who challenges, among other things, a former trustee’s Final Accounting of the trust. The trial court dismissed Mr. May’s complaint on res judicata grounds. For the following reasons, we affirm in part and reverse in part.
“To rule on a motion to dismiss, a court’s gaze is limited to the four corners of the complaint, including the attachments incorporated in it, and all well pleaded allegations are taken as true.” U.S. Project Mgmt., Inc. v. Parc Royale E. Dev., Inc., 861 So.2d 74, 76 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003). Typically affirmative defenses, like res ju-dicata in this case, cannot be properly considered on a motion to dismiss. See, e.g., Calder Race Course, Inc. v. Dep’t of Bus. & Prof'l Regulation, 838 So.2d 1241 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003) (reversing because “the affirmative defense of res judicata [was not] conclusively demonstrated within the four corners of the complaint”). There is an exception, however, when the face of the complaint and attachments demonstrate a defense’s unquestionable merit. See, e.g., Duncan v. Prudential Ins. Co., 690 So.2d 687, 688 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997).
In this case, the trial court dismissed the complaint, finding that Mr. May’s claims were “res judicata on the face of the complaint.” On appeal, this court granted ap-pellees’ motion to take judicial notice of prior cases involving Mr. May, the trust, and the trustees, after no response to the motion was filed.1 See Lagarde v. Outdoor Resorts of Am,., Inc., 428 So.2d 669, 670 (Fla. 2d DCA 1982) (taking judicial notice of the record and affirming a res judicata-based dismissal).
Upon review of the record, we can find no basis for concluding that Mr. May has already litigated claims alleging “deficiencies” in the former trustee’s Final Accounting of the trust. See Compl. Count I, ¶¶ 12a-12f. In fact, the Final Accounting at issue here was not even completed until after the filing of the amended complaint in the previous litigation. For this reason, we reverse the trial court’s decision to dismiss all of Count I on the basis of res judicata.
We affirm, however, the trial court’s decision to dismiss allegations 12g, 12h, and 12i of Count I, and Count II of the Complaint. These claims allege “breaches” by the former trustee, Mr. Salter, which have already been litigated.
AFFIRMED IN PART, REVERSED IN PART, and REMANDED for proceedings consistent with this opinion.
CLARK, MAKAR, and OSTERHAUS, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Neapolitan Enters., LLC v. The City OF Naples, 185 So. 3d 585 (Fla. 2d DCA 2016)
-
Seminole Tribe OF Florida v. State, 202 So. 3d 971 (Fla. 1st DCA 2016)
-
Geoffrey C.F. MAY v. Salter, 139 So. 3d 375 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014)
Previewing 3 of 5 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Prince Narvel Wray v. State, 690 So. 2d 687 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997)
- U.S. Project Mgmt., Inc. v. Parc Royale E. Dev., Inc., 861 So. 2d 74 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003)
- Augustin P. Lagarde, Jr. v. Outdoor Resorts OF Am., Inc., 428 So. 2d 669 (Fla. 2d DCA 1982)
- Geoffrey C.F. MAY v. Salter, 139 So. 3d 375 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014)
- Woodring v. Wise Microcomputer Solutions, Inc., 838 So. 2d 1241 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003)