Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

188 F.3d 1293

Docket No. 96-4884.

Stone Sps v. Wall

United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit.

Sept. 16, 1999.

Cited by 2 later decisions — most recently May 2018

1 state decisions

1 counsel of record

Relies on Stone Sps v. Wall · 734 So. 2d 1038 - State v. Fessenden

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Opinion by Per Curiam · Decided 1999-09-16

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida (No. 95-2588-CV-SM); Stanley Marcus, Judge.

Before EDMONDSON, Circuit Judge, and WELLFORD*, Senior Circuit Judge.

PER CURIAM:

¶1

In this diversity suit, plaintiffs asserted a common law action for interference with a parent/child relationship or abduction. The United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida dismissed the claim pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. Pro. 12(b)(6), concluding that Florida recognized no claim for which relief could be granted on those grounds. We certified the question to the Supreme Court of Florida, see Stone v. Wall, 135 F.3d 1438, 1443 (11th Cir.1998), and asked:

¶2

Whether a cause of action exists for interference with the parent/child relationship where a third party (that is, a nonparent who has no custody rights over that child) intentionally abducts a minor child from a parent legally entitled to the child's custody?

¶3

The Supreme Court of Florida has answered "Yes." See Stone v. Wall, 734 So.2d 1038 (Fla.1999). Therefore, we VACATE the district court decision, dismissing this case for failure to state a claim upon which relief could be granted, and REMAND for further proceedings.

¶4

VACATED AND REMANDED.

NOTES:

*

Honorable Harry W. Wellford, Senior U.S. Circuit Judge for the Sixth Circuit, sitting by designation.

This decision is rendered by a quorum. 28 U.S.C. 46(d).

/188/f3d/1293 · .json · Public domain