ABEL TURNER

v.

DONNA KNIGHT AND HER HEIRS, ASSIGNS, TENANTS, AGENTS, EMPLOYEES,

DONNA KNIGHT and her heirs, assigns, tenants, agents, employees, and all others claiming through her,

Appellees. _____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Taylor County. Darren K. Jackson, Judge.

September 1, 2023

B.L. THOMAS, J.

This appeal arose out of a dispute between Appellant and Appellee, Donna Knight, who are neighboring landowners and cousins. Appellant sought to recognize an easement through Appellee’s property and permanently enjoin Appellee from interfering from Appellant’s use of the easement. Appellee moved to involuntarily dismiss the claim, because under Chapter 704, Florida Statutes, for an easement to be established the property at issue must be cut off or hemmed in from the public roadway, and Appellant’s property was not cut off or hemmed in because there is already an easement.

At hearing, Appellee argued that the motion to dismiss should be granted because Appellant failed to state a cause of action. Appellant objected that the ground for the motion had changed and was not properly noticed. Appellee explained that the original motion was being renewed under a different rule. The trial court entered a final order dismissing the complaint with prejudice for failure to allege a cause of action for which relief may be granted, stating that an easement already existed which prevented Appellant’s property from being landlocked. “When reviewing an order granting a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim, ‘it must be assumed that all allegations in the complaint are true and all reasonable inferences must be drawn in favor of the pleader.’” The Tribune Co. Holdings, Inc. v. State, Dept. of Revenue, 34 So. 3d 762, 765 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010). Also, the trial court’s review must limit itself to the four corners of the complaint. Santiago v. Mauna Loa Investments, LLC, 189 So. 3d 752, 756 (Fla. 2016) (“Thus, review for the sufficiency of a complaint to state a cause of action is limited solely to the complaint at issue and its attachments.”); see also Sumner v. Gros, 958 So. 2d 1038, 1039 (Fla. 1st DCA 2007). The trial court’s order granting the motion to dismiss stated that the court heard argument and extensive testimony from the parties, specifically stating, “the record showed that [Appellant] is already in possession of a recorded easement” and “[d]etailed testimony was also given as to the land in which the recorded access easement covered.” Thus, the trial court erred when it did not limit itself to the four corners of the complaint. REVERSED and REMANDED.

KELSEY and WINOKUR, JJ., concur. _____________________________