HENRY ANGELO & SONS, INC., AND H. ANGELO & CO., INC., A/K/A H. ANGELO & CO., INC., APPELLANTS,
v.
INSURANCE COMPANY OF NORTH AMERICA, APPELLEE
HENRY ANGELO & SONS, INC., AND H. ANGELO & CO., INC., A/K/A H. ANGELO & CO., INC., APPELLANTS,
INSURANCE COMPANY OF NORTH AMERICA, APPELLEE
451 So. 2d 1038
Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (1984)
Caution
Cited by 20 cases
Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.
The appellants appeal an order dismissing a counterclaim because they had filed, as plaintiffs, a prior action in the State of North Carolina upon the same subject matter which is the subject matter of their counterclaim in the instant proceeding.
We reverse and remand the matter to the trial court to enter an order of abatement as to the counterclaim pending resolution of the North Carolina proceeding. Birnholz v. Steisel, 338 So. 2d 862 (Fla.3d DCA 1976); Cicero v. Paradis, 184 So. 2d 212 (Fla.2d DCA 1966).
Reversed and remanded with directions.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Murray Rosen v. Marlin, 486 So. 2d 623 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986)…t form the basis of a claim for conversion. Capital Bank v. G & J Investment Corporation, supra; Schimmel v. Merrill Lynch Pierce Fenner & Smith, Inc., 464 So. 2d 602 (Fla.3d DCA 1985); Plotch v. Gregory, supra; Douglas v. Braman Porsche Audi, Inc., 451 So. 2d 1038 (Fla.3d DCA 1984). This is not a case where a party intentionally received a specifically identifiable sum of money knowing that he had no right to take it and who refused to give it back as was the case in Senfeld v. Bank of Nova Scotia Trust Comp…1 / 2
-
Futch v. Head, 511 So. 2d 314 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987)…of money in general and as such was not the proper basis for conversion. See Rosen v. Marlin, 486 So. 2d 623 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986); accord Capital Bank v. G &J Investments Corp., 468 So. 2d 534 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985); Douglas v. Braman Porsche Audi, Inc., 451 So. 2d 1038 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984). We also note that although the trial court judge found that “[pjlaintiff was damaged by the breech [sic] of contract and subsequent conversion in the amount of $130,000,” he nowhere specifies how Futch’s conversion resulted in s…
-
Elec. Sec. Sys. Corp. v. S. Bell Tel. & Tel. Co., 482 So. 2d 518 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986)…S’s negligence count was based solely on the breach of contract claim. Since a breach of contract, alone, cannot constitute a cause of action in tort, the trial court properly dismissed the negligence count. See Douglas v. Braman Porsche Audi, Inc., 451 So. 2d 1038 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984); Belford Trucking Co. v. Zagar, 243 So. 2d 646 (Fla. 4th DCA 1970). It is only when the breach of contract is attended by some additional conduct which amounts to an independent tort that such breach can constitute negligence. See…
Previewing 3 of 10 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Cicero v. Paradis, 184 So. 2d 212 (Fla. 2d DCA 1966)
- Standford Birnholz v. Steisel, 338 So. 2d 862 (Fla. 3d DCA 1976)