Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

723 So. 2d 359

Williams v. Sebring Housing & Development

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided December 23, 1998

District Court of Appeal of Florida · decided 1998-12-23

Cited by 2 later decisions — most recently October 2003

2 state decisions

Relies on 122 So. 2d 571 - Matthews v. Matthews · 486 So. 2d 37 - Plant v. Decker · Hajec v. Town of Medley

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1998-12-23

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

CASANUEVA, Judge.

¶1The Williamses appeal a final order dismissing, with prejudice, their initial verified complaint against Sebring Housing and Development Authority, their landlord, and the landlord’s manager, Parent Management Company, Although the trial court was correct to dismiss the complaint as pleaded, we reverse the dismissal because it was done with prejudice. At this stage of the proceeding, it cannot be said that the Williamses could not plead circumstances that would entitle them to relief. See Hajec v. Town of Medley, 189 So.2d 835 (Fla. 3d DCA 1966); Matthews v. Matthews, 122 So.2d 571 (Fla. 2d DCA 1960). The Williamses should be given the opportunity to submit an amended complaint, if they are able to do so, that properly sets forth the elements of a cause of action. See Plant v. Decker, 486 So.2d 37 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986).

¶2*360Affirmed in part; reversed in part; and remanded for further proceedings.

THREADGILL, A.C.J., and QUINCE, J., Concur.
/723/so2d/359 · .json · Public domain