EARL SMITH, APPELLANT,
v.
CITY OF FORT MYERS AND LEE COUNTY, 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.
Earl Smith appeals the dismissal of his amended complaint seeking a declaratory decree that the City of Fort Myers' approval of a property transfer to Lee County violated Florida law and local ordinance. The court reverses, holding that Smith adequately pleaded a cause of action for declaratory relief and that the trial court erred in dismissing the complaint with prejudice.
The complaint adequately alleges a cause of action for declaratory relief. Smith alleged all required elements: a bona fide dispute between the parties, a justiciable question regarding the existence of the City's right to transfer the property without proper notice, doubt as to the City's rights, and a bona fide, actual, present need for the declaration. Therefore, the trial court erred in dismissing the amended complaint with prejudice.
[1] A trial court must accept a plaintiff's allegations as true and in a light most favorable to the plaintiff when ruling on a motion to dismiss for failure to state a cause…
[2] An appellate court must accept the facts alleged in a complaint as true when reviewing a trial court's order on a motion to dismiss.
Previewing 2 of 5 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“A trial court must accept a plaintiffs allegations as true and in a light most favorable to the plaintiff when ruling on a defendant's motion to dismiss for failure to state a cause of action.”
Establishes the standard of review for motions to dismiss, requiring courts to view allegations favorably to the plaintiff.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceSmith filed a complaint seeking a declaratory decree challenging the City of Fort Myers' approval of the transfer of certain property to Lee County. S…
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 Declaratory Judgment Requirements cases and more on FLexlaw
WHATLEY, Judge.
Earl Smith appeals a final order dismissing his amended complaint against the City of Fort Myers and Lee County with prejudice. Smith’s complaint sought a declaratory decree that the City’s approval of the transfer of certain property to the County violated both section 163.380, Florida Statutes (2003), and the City Code of the City of Fort Myers. We conclude that the trial court erred in dismissing the amended complaint with prejudice and reverse.
A trial court must accept a plaintiffs allegations as true and in a light most favorable to the plaintiff when ruling on a defendant’s motion to dismiss for failure to state a cause of action. Lutz Lake Fern Rd. Neighborhood Groups, Inc. v. Hillsborough County, 779 So. 2d 380, 383 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000). Furthermore, this court must accept the facts alleged in a complaint as true when reviewing such order on a motion to dismiss. Id. The standard of review is de novo. Id.
In determining the sufficiency of a complaint for declaratory judgment, the question is whether the plaintiff is entitled to a declaration of rights, not whether the plaintiff will prevail in obtaining the decree he or she seeks. Id. In Bell v. Associated Independents, Inc., 143 So. 2d 904, 908 (Fla. 2d DCA 1962), this court held that a complaint for declaratory relief should allege that there is a bona fide dispute between the parties and that the moving party has a justiciable question as to the existence or non-existence of some right, status, immunity, power or privilege, or as to some fact upon which the existence of such right, status, immunity, power or privilege does or may de[p]end, that plaintiff is in doubt as to the right, status, immunity, power or privilege, and that there is a bona fide, actual, present need for the declaration.
(Citations omitted).
Here, the complaint met these requirements. Smith alleged that a dispute existed between Smith and the City regarding whether the City complied with the notice provisions of section 163.380 and the city code, where such notice was required before the City had the right to transfer the property to the County. Smith further alleged that there is a need for the declaration in order to prevent the citizens of the City from suffering irreparable injury for which there is no adequate remedy at law. Because the allegations in the complaint state a cause of action for declaratory relief, the trial court erred in granting the motion to dismiss.
We do not express any opinion on the ultimate resolution of the case. We only hold that the allegations of the complaint are sufficient to state a cause of action for declaratory relief. The order dismissing the amended complaint is reversed and the cause is remanded for further proceedings.
Reversed and remanded.
ALTENBERND, C.J., and CASANUEVA, J., Concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Karem Elena Romo v. Amedex Ins. Co., 930 So. 2d 643 (Fla. 3d DCA 2006)…the plaintiff is entitled to a declaration of its rights, not to whether it is entitled to a declaration in its favor.’ ” Royal Selections, Inc. v. Fla. Dep’t of Revenue, 687 So. 2d 893, 894 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997); see also Smith v. City of Fort Myers, 898 So. 2d 1177, 1178 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005)(“In determining the sufficiency of a complaint for declaratory judgment, the question is whether the plaintiff is entitled to a declaration of rights, not whether the plaintiff will prevail in obtaining the decree he or she…1 / 2
-
Hazen v. Allstate Ins. Co., 952 So. 2d 531 (Fla. 2d DCA 2007)…td. ex rel. Lifemark Hosps. of Fla., Inc. v. Lefor, 749 So. 2d 546, 547 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000). We apply the de novo standard of review to our consideration of the final judgment dismissing Hazen’s action with prejudice. See Smith v. City of Fort Myers, 898 So. 2d 1177,1178 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005). Hazen is a resident of Polk County, Florida. Allstate is a foreign insurance company that maintains an office or offices in Polk County. On March 9, 2003, Hazen’s 2001 Cadillac DeVille was involved in an accident with anoth…
-
Angelo's Aggregate Materials, Ltd. v. Pasco Cnty., 118 So. 3d 971 (Fla. 2d DCA 2013)…some fact upon which the existence of such right[ or] status ... does or may de[p]end, that plaintiff is in doubt as to the right [or] status, ... and that there is a bona fide, actual, present need for the declaration. Smith v. City of Fort Myers, 898 So. 2d 1177, 1178 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005) (emphases added) (quoting Bell v. Associated Indeps., Inc., 143 So. 2d 904, 908 (Fla. 2d DCA 1962)). Where a complaint for declaratory action meets these requirements it should not be dismissed for failure to state a cause o…1 / 2
Previewing 3 of 9 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Bell v. Saxon, 143 So. 2d 904 (Fla. 2d DCA 1962)
- Lutz Lake Fern Rd. Neighborhood Grps., Inc. v. Hillsborough Cnty., 779 So. 2d 380 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000)