PERUZ SARAJIAN, APPELLANT,
v.
JAMES PILAFIAN, 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.
This case reviews a summary judgment granted against the plaintiff based on the statute of limitations. The appellate court affirmed the lower court's decision, finding that the lawsuit was filed after the applicable four-year statute of limitations had expired.
Yes, the trial court correctly applied the statute of limitations. The lawsuit was filed more than four years after the alleged negligent act occurred, which is the period prescribed by the relevant statute.
“The amended complaint, bottomed solely on the tortious charge, was governed by the four year Statute of Limitations, which commenced to run on the date of the alleged breach of duty on the part of the appellee.”
Establishes the governing statute of limitations and its commencement date.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe plaintiff filed an amended complaint alleging negligence against the defendant. The defendant raised the affirmative defense of the statute of lim…
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 Affirmative Defense cases and more on FLexlaw
Appellant, plaintiff in the trial' court, seeks review of an adverse final summary judgment, dismissing her amended complaint of negligence with prejudice following the filing of an answer setting up the affirmative defense of the Statute of Limitations. See:§ 95.11, Fla.Stat., F.S.A.; Manning v. Serrano, Fla.1957, 97 So.2d 688.
The amended complaint, bottomed solely on the tortious charge, was governed by the four year Statute of Limitations, which commenced to run on the date of the alleged breach of duty on the part of the ap-pellee. It appearing that the cause was instituted more than four years after the date of the alleged negligent act, the trial judge correctly applied the Statute of Limitations in entering the summary judgment and, therefore, same is hereby affirmed.
Affirmed.