¶1Because the appellant failed to comply with the requirements of section 768.28(6), Florida Statutes (1991), the trial court properly dismissed his complaint. Since, however, the statute of limitations had not yet run at the time of dismissal, the appellant shall have the opportunity to file an amended complaint after compliance with the statute. Wright v. Polk County Public Health Unit, 601 So.2d 1318 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992); Hamide v. State, Dep’t of Corrections, 548 So.2d 877 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989); Wemett v. Duval County, 485 So.2d 892 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986). We therefore affirm the dismissal of the complaint and remand for further proceedings.
652 So. 2d 1257
Lane v. Eckert
District Court of Appeal of Florida
Decided April 7, 1995
District Court of Appeal of Florida · decided 1995-04-07
Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently July 2001
1 state decisions
Relies on 485 So. 2d 892 - Wemett v. Duval County · 548 So. 2d 877 - Hamide v. STATE, DEPT. OF CORRECTIONS · 601 So. 2d 1318 - Wright v. POLK CTY. PUBLIC HEALTH UNIT
Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know
Decided 1995-04-07
View the full empirical analysis of this case →