Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

353 So. 2d 925

Roehner v. Atlantic Coast Development Corp.

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided January 4, 1978

District Court of Appeal of Florida · decided 1978-01-04

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently October 1980

1 state decisions

Relies on Poulos v. Vordermeier

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1978-01-04

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

PER CURIAM.

¶1This is an appeal from an order denying a motion to dismiss an action to foreclose an equitable lien. Review in this case should have been initiated by interlocutory appeal rather than application for a writ of certiorari. However, we will treat the petition as an interlocutory appeal and proceed to the merits.

¶2The respondent filed an action to foreclose an equitable lien and for legal damages. The petitioners filed a motion to dismiss the equitable lien action alleging that the complaint on its face showed that the lien action was barred by the statute of limitations. A defense based on the statute of limitations can be asserted in a motion to dismiss if the facts constituting the defense appear on the face of the complaint. Poulos v. Vordermeier, 327 So.2d 245 (Fla. 4th DCA 1976). Here such facts do appear on the face of the complaint, and the motion to dismiss should have been granted as to the equitable lien with the action for damages remaining as a separate cause of action. Accordingly, the order of the trial court denying the motion to dismiss the equitable lien action is hereby reversed with directions that an order be entered in accordance with this opinion.

¶3REVERSED WITH DIRECTIONS.

ALDERMAN, C. J., and DOWNEY and ANSTEAD, JJ., concur.
/353/so2d/925 · .json · Public domain