Motion For More Definite Statement

119 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• Augustine v. S. Bell Tel. & Tel. Co.
  91 So. 2d 320· Fla.· 1956-12-12 ·cited 63×
  The court held that the pension plan's provisions, including deductions for Social Security benefits, were validly interpreted and administered, and that the plan's integration with Social Security did not violate the Social Security Act.
• Wilson v. Clark
  414 So. 2d 526· Fla. 1st DCA· 1982-04-01 ·cited 58×
  Ray Wilson appealed the denial of his motion to dismiss a complaint for lease cancellation and rescission filed by Effie Steele. The case was tried and judgment entered in Steele's favor, but she died before the personal representative could be substituted within the 90-day deadl
• Hylton Harman v. The Valley Nat'l Bank OF Ariz.
  339 F.2d 564· 9th Cir.· 1964-12-17 ·cited 51×
  The court held that dismissal for failure to state a claim was improper because the complaint, despite its vagueness, could potentially allege a triable claim under antitrust laws, and vagueness should be addressed by a motion for a more definite statement.
• Gibraltar Serv. Corp. v. Lone & Assocs., Inc.
  488 So. 2d 582· Fla. 4th DCA· 1986-04-30 ·cited 47×
  Gibraltar Service Corporation and Gibraltar Financial Corporation appeal the denial of their motion to vacate a default judgment entered against them. The court reversed, holding that the default was improperly entered because defendants' responsive pleadings were mailed on the s
• Amendments to the Florida Rules of Civil Procedure
  773 So. 2d 1098· Fla.· 2000-10-05 ·cited 43×
  This is a Florida Supreme Court order adopting proposed amendments to the Florida Rules of Civil Procedure, submitted by the Civil Procedure Rules Committee. The court approves substantive amendments to multiple rules and forms, effective January 1, 2001.
• David L. Shannon and Helen v. Shannon
  105 So. 2d 16· Fla. 2d DCA· 1958-06-04 ·cited 41×
  In this replevin action over a Cessna aircraft, the appellants filed an amended complaint that inadvertently dropped the original defendants (appellees) while addressing only the third defendant (Kalemba). The court below entered final judgment dismissing the action against appel
• Jarzynka v. St. Thomas Univ. Sch. of Law
  310 F. Supp. 2d 1256· S.D. Fla.· 2004-03-23 ·cited 40×
  The court held that a university is not liable in negligence for academic or disciplinary decisions absent malice, and that tortious interference claims do not lie against an agent of a contracting party.
• Brown v. Vt. Mut. Ins. Co.
  614 So. 2d 574· Fla. 1st DCA· 1993-02-12 ·cited 37×
  Attorney Evans appealed the trial court's denial of his motion for attorney's fees and costs after his clients' insurance dispute with Vermont Mutual was settled without his knowledge. The court held that an insurer cannot avoid statutory attorney's fees by settling directly with
• In re Craftmatic Securities Litigation v. Kraftsow
  890 F.2d 628· 3d Cir.· 1989-11-29 ·cited 37×
  The court held that liability under § 12(2) extends to those who solicit purchases, not just immediate sellers, and that allegations of deceptive practices in marketing, if proven, are actionable under federal securities laws, distinguishing them from mere corporate mismanagement
• New Lenox Indus., Inc. v. Fenton
  510 F. Supp. 2d 893· M.D. Fla.· 2007-05-03 ·cited 26×
  The court held that personal jurisdiction over the defendants was proper under Florida's long-arm statute and the Due Process Clause, and that the breach of contract claim was not time-barred on the face of the pleadings.
• Collins v. State
  489 So. 2d 188· Fla. 5th DCA· 1986-05-29 ·cited 25×
  Michael Jay Collins appealed his dual convictions for trafficking in stolen goods, arguing they constituted double jeopardy because the charging counts contained identical language. The Florida Fifth District Court of Appeal, sitting en banc, affirmed the convictions, finding no
• Bond v. Koscot Interplanetary, Inc.
  246 So. 2d 631· Fla. 4th DCA· 1971-04-02 ·cited 25×
  Plaintiffs appealed the dismissal of their complaint against Koscot Interplanetary and related defendants, alleging pyramid scheme violations, securities law violations, conspiracy, and breach of a consent decree. The court reversed in part, holding that counts alleging contract
• Marshall v. Segona
  621 F.2d 763· 5th Cir.· 1980-07-16 ·cited 24×
  The court held that dismissal with prejudice was an excessive sanction for the Secretary of Labor's four-day delay in filing supplemental discovery answers, especially when the delay was due to attorney error and the client was not at fault.
• Veltmann v. Walpole Pharmacy, Inc.
  928 F. Supp. 1161· M.D. Fla.· 1996-06-10 ·cited 23×
  The court held that the plaintiffs' complaint must be dismissed because they lacked standing, their claims were time-barred, and they failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted.
• Boldstar Tech., LLC v. Home Depot, Inc.
  517 F. Supp. 2d 1283· S.D. Fla.· 2007-10-03 ·cited 22×
  The court held that a tortious interference claim requires a business relationship that likely would have been completed but for the interference, and that a fraud claim based on a broken promise for future sale of goods is barred by the statute of frauds.
• Betancourt v. Marine Cargo Mgmt., Inc.
  930 F. Supp. 606· S.D. Fla.· 1996-06-21 ·cited 19×
  The court held that while federal claims for hostile work environment survive a motion to dismiss, a more definite statement is required regarding the effect of the harassment and its frequency; state law tort claims are dismissed without prejudice.
• Scarfato v. Nat'l Cash Register Corp.
  830 F. Supp. 1441· M.D. Fla.· 1993-09-09 ·cited 18×
  The court held that a complaint alleging a product was unreasonably dangerous and caused damages is sufficient to state a claim for negligence under federal pleading rules, but a loss of consortium claim requires a valid marriage at the time of injury.
• Stern v. Perma-Stress, Inc.
  134 So. 2d 509· Fla. 1st DCA· 1961-11-16 ·cited 17×
  Paul R. Stern, trustee and mortgagee, appealed from an order denying his motions to dismiss a complaint for foreclosure of a mechanic's and materialman's lien filed by Perma-Stress, Inc. The court held that the complaint was fatally defective for failing to allege the contractor'
• Drozewski v. State
  84 So. 2d 329· Fla.· 1955-12-20 ·cited 17×
  Charles Drozewski was convicted of manslaughter (rather than the charged murder in the first degree) for causing the death of Barney Ras by drowning during a drinking altercation. On appeal, Drozewski challenged the sufficiency of the indictment, evidentiary rulings, the convicti
• Exhibit Icons, LLC v. XP Cos., LLC
  609 F. Supp. 2d 1282· S.D. Fla.· 2009-03-26 ·cited 15×
  The court held that sufficient minimum contacts existed to establish specific personal jurisdiction over XP Companies, LLC, based on extensive communications directed at Florida, and that XP Entertainment, LLC's substantial and continuous business activities in Florida were suffi
• Englander Motors, Inc. v. Ford Motor Co.
  267 F.2d 11· 6th Cir.· 1959-05-26 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the dealer sufficiently alleged violations of the Clayton Act and Sherman Act, and that the accounting claim might be viable if individual jurisdictional amounts can be shown.
• Porter v. Karavas
  157 F.2d 984· 10th Cir.· 1946-11-06 ·cited 14×
  A complaint is not subject to dismissal for failing to identify purchasers by name if the purchasers are unknown to the plaintiff, and the remedy for indefiniteness is a motion for a more definite statement, not dismissal.
• Neizil v. Williams
  543 F. Supp. 899· M.D. Fla.· 1982-07-16 ·cited 11×
  The court held that it had personal jurisdiction over defendant Bonham Brothers and that venue was proper in the Florida district, denying motions to dismiss and transfer.
• In re Asbestos Litigation
  679 F. Supp. 1096· S.D. Fla.· 1987-07-13 ·cited 10×
  The court held that plaintiffs' complaints sufficiently stated claims for negligence, strict liability, breach of implied warranty, conspiracy, and punitive damages, and that personal jurisdiction was properly asserted under Florida's long-arm statute.
• Edward T. and Isabel J. Lysek v. Commissioner OF Internal Revenue
  583 F.2d 1088· 9th Cir.· 1978-10-10 ·cited 10×
  The court held that taxpayers waived their claim to deductions exceeding those claimed on their returns by failing to amend their pleadings as ordered, and that the Tax Court's findings regarding other deductions, property allocation, and penalties were not clearly erroneous.
• Ybarra v. City OF SAN Jose
  503 F.2d 1041· 9th Cir.· 1974-12-16 ·cited 10×
  The court held that dismissing the action for failure to state a claim was improper, as the complaint alleged racial discrimination in zoning and land use that could lead to segregated schools.
• Atl. Seaboard Corp. v. Madeleine Kneppelhout van Sterkenburg and Cornelis Kneppelhout Van Sterkenburg
  318 F.2d 455· 4th Cir.· 1963-06-03 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the condemnees' preliminary motions were unallowable under Rule 71A, their jury demand was untimely, and the post-judgment order allowing immediate possession was within the court's authority.
• Griffin v. Locke
  286 F.2d 514· 9th Cir.· 1961-01-31 ·cited 10×
  The court held that a dismissal order must clearly state its grounds to allow a party to make an informed decision about amending their complaint.
• Gulf Coast W. Oil Co., Inc. v. Trapp
  165 F.2d 343· 10th Cir.· 1947-08-21 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the complaint stated a cause of action against defendant Trapp for misappropriation of corporate assets and unfair stock exchange.
• Durso v. Summer Brook Preserve Homeowners Ass'n
  641 F. Supp. 2d 1256· M.D. Fla.· 2008-06-23 ·cited 9×
  The court granted motions to strike a pleading that did not comply with court orders and dismissed claims for violation of the FDCPA, RICO, and a criminal statute lacking civil liability.
• Aventura Cable Corp. v. Rifkin/Narragansett S. Fla. Catv Ltd. P'ship
  941 F. Supp. 1189· S.D. Fla.· 1996-08-18 ·cited 9×
  The court held that the plaintiff sufficiently pleaded claims under the Sherman Anti-Trust Act but failed to establish an implied private right of action under the Federal Cable Act. The motion for a more definite statement was denied.
• Fed. Deposit Ins. v. Gonzalez-Gorrondona
  833 F. Supp. 1545· S.D. Fla.· 1993-03-19 ·cited 8×
  The court held that 12 U.S.C. § 1821(k) displaces federal common law claims for negligence against directors and officers of failed banks, but does not preempt state law claims for ordinary negligence.
• Feller v. EAU Gallie Yacht Basin, Inc.
  397 So. 2d 1155· Fla. 5th DCA· 1981-04-01 ·cited 8×
  A complaint alleging conclusions of law or evidentiary facts, rather than ultimate facts, should not be dismissed for failure to state a cause of action.
• Hargis v. The Fla. Real Est. Comm'n & Earle L. Mann
  153 So. 2d 836· Fla. 2d DCA· 1963-05-29 ·cited 8×
  Hargis, a real estate broker, sought review of the Florida Real Estate Commission's denial of his motion to quash an amended information charging him with fraud, misrepresentation, and dishonest dealing in fifteen real estate transactions. The court affirmed that the amended info
• Erickson v. Hunter
  932 F. Supp. 1380· M.D. Fla.· 1996-04-10 ·cited 7×
  The court denied most motions to dismiss, finding that plaintiffs' claims for constitutional violations and discrimination could proceed, but granted the motion to strike punitive damages against Collier County.
• Indian Lake Ests., Inc. v. Special Invs., Inc.
  154 So. 2d 892· Fla. 2d DCA· 1963-05-15 ·cited 7×
  The court affirmed the trial court's denial of the appellant's motions.
• Miller v. Bill Rivers Trailers, Inc.
  450 So. 2d 334· Fla. 1st DCA· 1984-05-23 ·cited 6×
  Miller appealed the dismissal of his breach of contract complaint against Bill Rivers Trailers for unpaid sales commissions. The court reversed the dismissal, holding that the complaint contained sufficient allegations of contractual breach and that Miller could recover either on
• Oster v. Sylvan B. Krause
  168 So. 2d 558· Fla. 3d DCA· 1964-11-03 ·cited 6×
  A co-trustee can sue for removal of another trustee, and a complaint alleging misconduct is sufficient if it provides notice of the cause of action, even if lacking specific details.
• Great Am. Indem. Co. v. Brown
  307 F.2d 306· 5th Cir.· 1962-09-06 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the plaintiff's complaint sufficiently stated special damages and that the trial court did not err in its findings of fact or denial of a new trial.
• Patton v. Carlson
  132 So. 2d 793· Fla. 1st DCA· 1961-09-07 ·cited 6×
  In a contract dispute over acoustical tile installation for a school construction project, the appellate court reversed a summary judgment against the defendants, holding that evidence regarding the interpretation of contract specifications was admissible under the defendants' ge
• Petition of Cmax, Inc. v. Honorable Peirson M. Hall
  290 F.2d 736· 9th Cir.· 1961-03-30 ·cited 6×
  A writ of mandamus is not appropriate to correct an order for more definite statement when the petitioner has alternative remedies, such as appealing a dismissal after refusing to comply.
• Gering v. State
  252 So. 3d 334· Fla. 3d DCA· 2018-07-25 ·cited 5×
  Trial courts have authority to enter directed verdicts in Jimmy Ryce jury trials because the Jimmy Ryce Act and Jimmy Ryce Rules expressly incorporate the Florida Rules of Civil Procedure by their terms, and nothing in those rules or statutes supersedes or prohibits Rule 1.480(a)
• Elliott v. Sherwood Manor Mobile Home Park
  947 F. Supp. 1574· M.D. Fla.· 1996-11-25 ·cited 5×
  The court held that the plaintiff adequately stated claims under the Federal and Florida Fair Housing Acts but failed to state a claim under the ADA. The court also found the Park was a proper party under the Federal Fair Housing Act but not the Florida Act.
• Pucci v. USAir
  940 F. Supp. 305· M.D. Fla.· 1996-09-27 ·cited 5×
  The court held that the alleged conduct, while uncivilized, did not rise to the level of outrageousness required for intentional infliction of emotional distress in an employment context, but assault and battery claims could be amended. The court also denied motions for a more de
• L.S.T., Inc. v. Crow
  772 F. Supp. 1254· M.D. Fla.· 1991-09-12 ·cited 5×
  The court denied defendants' motions to dismiss, finding the complaint adequately stated federal and state claims and that questions of official capacity and procurement were for the jury.
• O'Connor v. Kawasaki Motors Corp.
  699 F. Supp. 1538· S.D. Fla.· 1988-07-08 ·cited 5×
  The court held that diversity jurisdiction was proper, denied the motion to remand, granted in part and denied in part the motions to dismiss, and granted the motion to strike the prayer for interest.
• Sheffield v. Paul Cook Carter and wife
  141 So. 2d 780· Fla. 2d DCA· 1962-06-01 ·cited 5×
  The Carters sought to collaterally attack a 1955 quiet title decree obtained by Betty Sheffield against them through service by publication, alleging defects in the constructive service affidavit. The court reversed the denial of the motion to dismiss, holding that while the decr
• State Farm Fla. Ins. Co. v. Nordin
  312 So. 3d 200· Fla. 1st DCA· 2021-02-24 ·cited 4×
  The appellate court reversed a trial court's decision that an insurance company waived its right to appraisal by participating in litigation. The court found that the insurer's actions were consistent with its right to appraisal and that it invoked appraisal at the first reasonab
• Jensen v. Pinellas Cnty.
  293 So. 3d 1076· Fla. 2d DCA· 2020-04-03 ·cited 4×
  The appellate court reversed a trial court's dismissal of a fifth amended complaint with prejudice. The court found that the trial court's stated reasons for dismissal were insufficient and that the complaint, despite being amended multiple times, stated a cause of action.
• Williams v. Nat'l Freight, Inc.
  455 F. Supp. 2d 1335· M.D. Fla.· 2006-10-05 ·cited 4×
  The court held that a negligence claim based on a trailer floor collapse is sufficiently pleaded, but a product liability claim is not, and the employer is not a necessary party for joinder.