MANUEL A. MENOCAL
v.
MARK HARRINGTON, ETC., ET AL.
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.
When a defendant confesses error in considering material beyond the four corners of the complaint in granting a motion to dismiss, the appellate court summarily reverses and remands for further proceedings.
[1] A motion to dismiss under Florida law must be decided based solely on the allegations in the complaint and cannot consider material outside the four corners of the pleadi…
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 intelligenceMenocal, proceeding pro se, appealed a dismissal order granted by the trial court on a motion filed by the predecessor personal representative of two …
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 Personal Representative Authority cases and more on FLexlaw
Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida
Opinion filed May 27, 2026. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
No. 3D25-2247 Lower Tribunal No. 25-2566-CP-02
Manuel A. Menocal, Appellant,
vs.
Mark Harrington, etc., et al., Appellees.
An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Jose L. Fernandez, Judge.
Manuel A. Menocal, in proper person.
Marlow, Adler, Abrams & Rotunno, and Philip Glatzer and Jose I. Valdes, for appellees.
Before SCALES, C.J., and FERNANDEZ and GOODEN, JJ.
PER CURIAM.
On Confession Of Error
Appellant Manuel A. Menocal, pro se, appeals a July 3, 2025 order granting the motion to dismiss of the predecessor personal representative of the Estates of Anna Nikolic and Lieselotte Schnarr, thereby dismissing Menocal's amended complaint with prejudice. After the filing of Menocal's initial brief, appellee Mark Harrington, the current personal representative, filed a confession of error with this Court suggesting that, in granting the dismissal motion, the trial court considered material beyond the four corners of Menocal's amended complaint. We treat Harrington's confession of error as an answer brief and, without opining on whether the confession of error contains a correct recitation of the law, we summarily reverse the challenged order pursuant to Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.315(b) and remand for further proceedings. All pending motions are denied as moot.
Reversed based on confession of error.