ISRAEL C. CHARTRAND, APPELLANT,
v.
VONDA PARSONS, PERSONALLY, ET AL., 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 held that some counts of the pro se complaint were properly dismissed, while others should be remanded to allow for amendment.
The appellant, incarcerated and proceeding pro se, filed a complaint with nine counts against multiple defendants. The trial court sua sponte reviewed…
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 Sua Sponte Review cases and more on FLexlaw
Israel Chartrand appeals a final order that dismissed his complaint against a myriad of individuals. In his pro se complaint, Chartrand alleged nine counts: (1) civil conspiracy; (2) conversion; (3) breach of fiduciary duty; (4) intentional alienation; (5) demand for accounting; (6) undue influence; (7) intentional infliction of emotional distress; (8) appointment of a court monitor; and (9) review and removal of guardian.
Under the best of circumstances, Chart-rand would have difficulty meeting his burden of proof on these counts. Due to his incarceration in the Department of Corrections, these are not the best of circumstances for Mr. Chartrand. Perhaps recognizing this, the trial court sua sponte reviewed Chartrand’s complaint pursuant to section 57.085(6), Florida Statutes, and entered a final order dismissing the complaint with prejudice. In the order, the court dismissed count four because it requested damages for a mental injury without a related allegation of physical injury, and the remaining counts because they were unlikely to succeed on the merits. See § 57.085(6)(c), (9)(d), Fla. Stat. (2014).
We affirm the dismissal with prejudice of counts: (1) civil conspiracy; (2) conversion; (4) intentional alienation; (5) demand for accounting; (6) undue influence; and (7) intentional infliction of emotional distress. Chartrand is unable to establish any legal basis for relief on those counts. We reverse and remand, however, as to counts: (3) breach of fiduciary duty; (8) appointment of a court monitor; and (9) review and removal of guardian. While facing an uphill battle, Chartrand should at least be given an opportunity to amend his complaint on those counts.
AFFIRMED IN PART; REVERSED IN PART; AND REMANDED.
LAWSON and BERGER, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Gaston v. NNN Inv. Advisors (Fla. 4th DCA 2023)…orrect these defects, we reverse the dismissal of his complaint with prejudice and remand to allow him to file an amended complaint.”). Such is the case even where it seems unlikely that the plaintiff will be able to prevail. Chartrand v. Parsons, 164 So. 3d 117, 117 (Fla. 5th DCA 2015) (“Under the best of circumstances, [plaintiff] would have difficulty meeting his burden of proof . . . . Due to his incarceration . . . these are not the best of circumstances for [him]. . . . While facing an uphill battle,…