¶1Raul Vergara, plaintiff below, appeals a final order dismissing his second amended complaint with prejudice. After review of the briefs and record herein, we concur with the trial court that the second amended complaint did not state a cause of action, see Nickolauson v. Rhyne, 529 So.2d 365 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988), and that if any cause of action did exist, it would be barred by the statute of limitations. See § 95.11(4), Fla.Stat. (1989). The order under review is therefore affirmed.
568 So. 2d 976
Vergara v. Butter
District Court of Appeal of Florida
Decided October 9, 1990
District Court of Appeal of Florida · decided 1990-10-09
Cited by 3 later decisions — most recently August 2003
3 state decisions
Relies on Nickolauson v. Rhyne
Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know
Decided 1990-10-09
View the full empirical analysis of this case →