RASHEDAH AMATULLAH
v.
RONEY PALACE CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION, INC., 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.
A pro se complaint that commingles various claims against all defendants together without clearly stating the elements and supporting facts for each claim may be dismissed for failure to comply with pleading requirements.
[1] A complaint that commingles various claims against all defendants together without clearly stating the elements and facts supporting each claim may be dismissed for failu…
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 intelligence“It is a cardinal rule of pleading that a complaint be stated simply, in short and plain language. The complaint must set out the elements and the facts that support them so that the court and the defendant can clearly determine what is being alleged.”
Standard for adequate pleading in Florida, cited from Amatulah v. Palmier, 417 So. 3d 495, 496 (Fla. 3d DCA 2025)
Rashedah Amatullah, proceeding pro se, filed a complaint against Roney Palace Condominium Association and other defendants in Miami-Dade County Circui…
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.
Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida
Opinion filed September 24, 2026. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
No. 3D26-0086 Lower Tribunal No. 24-8567-CA-01
Rashedah Amatullah, Appellant,
vs.
Roney Palace Condominium Association, Inc., et al., Appellees.
An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Robert T. Watson, Judge.
Rashedah Amatullah, in proper person.
Hamilton Miller & Birthisel, LP, and Sheryl S. Natelson; Wilson Elser Moskowitz & Dicker, LLP, and Donna M. Krusbe (West Palm Beach); Zinober Diana & Monteverde, P.A., and Michael A. Monteverde and Natalya Lopez (Fort Lauderdale), for appellees.
Before SCALES, C.J., and LINDSEY and MILLER, JJ.
PER CURIAM.
Affirmed. See Amatulah v. Palmier, 417 So. 3d 495, 496 (Fla. 3d DCA 2025) (affirming dismissal of a pro se complaint filed by this same appellant, observing: "It is a cardinal rule of pleading that a complaint be stated simply, in short and plain language. The complaint must set out the elements and the facts that support them so that the court and the defendant can clearly determine what is being alleged[.]" (quoting Barrett v. City of Margate, 743 So. 2d 1160, 1162-63 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999))); Collado v. Baroukh, 226 So. 3d 924, 927 (Fla. 4th DCA 2017) (“Commingling various claims against all defendants together may also warrant dismissal of a complaint."); Alvarez v. DeAguirre, 395 So. 2d 213, 216 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981) (“While the policy in Florida is to liberally allow amendments to pleadings where justice so requires, a trial judge in the exercise of sound discretion may deny further amendments where a case has progressed to a point that liberality ordinarily to be indulged has diminished.") (citations omitted); P.B. v. Dep't of Child. & Fam. Servs., 709 So. 2d 590, 591 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998) (“We do not consider the question of adequate notice because Appellants did not object to the lack of notice in the proceedings below or request a continuance. The first time they raised the issue was on appeal. By failing to object and by proceeding on the matter at the hearing, Appellants waived their objections to the lack of notice.").
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Nazario Alvarez v. DeAGUIRRE, 395 So. 2d 213 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981)
- Barrett v. City OF Margate, 743 So. 2d 1160 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999)
- P.B. and B.B. v. Dep't of Child. & Fam. Servs., 709 So. 2d 590 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998)
- Collado v. Brigitte Baroukh, 226 So. 3d 924 (Fla. 4th DCA 2017)
- Rashedah Amatulah v. Palmier, 417 So. 3d 495 (Fla. 3d DCA 2025)