Churruca v. Miami Jai-Alai, Inc.
| Decision Date | 14 September 1976 |
| Docket Number | No. 75--838,JAI-ALA,INC,75--838 |
| Citation | 338 So.2d 228 |
| Parties | Francisco CHURRUCA et al., Appellants, v. MIAMI, et al., Appellees. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Heller & Kaplan, Miami, for appellants.
Frates, Floyd, Pearson, Stewart, Proenza & Richman and Ira H. Leesfield, William R. Dawes, Miami, Subin, Shams, Rosenbluth & Moran, Orlando, J. Riley Davis, Tallahassee, Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., Joseph M. Murasko, Fern Park, for appellees.
Before HENDRY, HAVERFIELD and NATHAN, JJ.
Plaintiffs appeal an order dismissing with prejudice their second amended complaint in an action for tortious conspiracy.
In 1968 plaintiffs, professional jai-alai players, formed a union and attempted to receive higher wages and increased benefits from the defendant jai-alai frontons by striking and refusing to honor their player contracts for the 1968--1969 season which caused their replacement by other players. Plaintiffs then sought re-employment for the 1969--1970 and ensuing seasons at the prevailing wages and conditions being offered to other jai-alai players; but because employment by a fronton is a prerequisite, they were unable to obtain licenses from defendant State Department of Business Regulation. In 1971 plaintiffs filed suit against the frontons for intentional interference with an advantageous relationship and conspiracy to deprive them of their right to earn a livelihood. The case was dismissed for failure to state a cause of action and the dismissal was affirmed by this court, 279 So.2d 107. A writ of certiorari to the Florida Supreme Court was discharged 'without prejudice to whatever rights, if any, petitioners may have for tortious conspiracy, if any, occurring subsequent to the 1968--69 jai-alai season.' See Churruca et al. v. Miami Jai-Alai et al., Fla.1974, 289 So.2d 395. Thereafter plaintiffs filed this action against the defendant frontons and Department of Business Regulation alleging a conspiracy on the part of all defendants in that they conspired not to employ plaintiffs. Their original and amended complaints having been dismissed, plaintiffs filed a second amended complaint which was dismissed with prejudice. Plaintiffs seek review of this dismissal. We affirm.
The gist of a civil action for conspiracy is not the conspiracy itself, but the civil wrong which is done pursuant to the conspiracy which results in damage to the plaintiff. Thus, it is generally held that an act which does not constitute a ground of action against one person cannot be made the basis of a civil action for conspiracy. Liappas v. Augoustis, Fla.1950, 47 So.2d 582; Loeb v. Geronemus, Fla.1953, 66 So.2d 241; Ocala Loan Company...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Kee v. National Reserve Life Ins. Co.
...a [cause] of action against one person cannot be made the basis of a civil action for conspiracy." Churruca v. Miami Jai-Alai, Inc., 338 So.2d 228, 229 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.1976), rev'd on other grounds, 353 So.2d 547 The basis of Kee's and CTL's conspiracy claim was that National informed othe......
-
Churruca v. Miami Jai-Alai, Inc.
...cause is before us on petition for writ of certiorari to review a decision of the District Court of Appeal, Third District, reported at 338 So.2d 228, which is alleged to be in conflict with Snipes v. West Flagler Kennel Club, Inc., 105 So.2d 164 (Fla.1958), and Margolin v. Morton F. Plant ......
-
Nephron Pharm. Corp. v. Jennifer Shelly Hulsey
...a [cause] of action against one person cannot be made the basis of a civil action for conspiracy." Churruca v. Miami Jai-Alai, Inc., 338 So.2d 228, 229 (Fla. 3d DCA 1976), rev'd on other grounds, 353 So.2d 547 (Fla. 1977). It appears that this allegation is an attempt by Nephron to repackag......
-
Fehlhaber v. Fehlhaber, 86-85
...Limited, 450 So.2d 1157 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984); In Re Estate of Vettese, 421 So.2d 737 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982); Churruca v. Miami Jai-Alai, Inc., 338 So.2d 228 (Fla. 3d DCA 1976); United States v. Plotke, 725 F.2d 1303 (11th Cir.1984); In Re Mortgage America Corporation, 714 F.2d 1266 (5th Cir.1983......
-
Business & commercial cases
...District , 403 So.2d 1025 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981), petition for rev. denied , 412 So.2d 463 (Fla. 1982). 7. Churruca v. Miami Jai-Alai, Inc. , 338 So.2d 228, 229 (Fla. 3d DCA 1976), reversed on other grounds and remanded , 353 So.2d 547 (Fla. 1977), portion in conflict with opinion of Supreme Co......