Dykema v. Godfrey, AY-20
| Decision Date | 25 April 1985 |
| Docket Number | No. AY-20,AY-20 |
| Citation | 10 Fla. L. Weekly 1058,467 So.2d 824 |
| Parties | 10 Fla. L. Weekly 1058 Jack DYKEMA, Appellant, v. G. Franklin GODFREY, et al. Appellees. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
David F. Holmes of Braverman & Holmes, Fort Lauderdale, for appellant.
Charles T. Boyd, Jr., of Boyd, Jenerette, Staas, Joos, Williams & Felton, P.A., Jacksonville, for appellees.
Appellant Jack Dykema brought an action alleging negligent malpractice against his former attorneys. The trial judge dismissed appellant's second amended complaint. The negligence claimed was that his attorneys failed to inform him of the Small Business Association's rejection of all offers to settle the action and the attorneys' subsequent failure to file an answer or any other pleading in the cause. The complaint was dismissed with prejudice on the ground that plaintiff failed to allege that there was a meritorious defense to the action to foreclose a Small Business Administration loan and a failure to allege facts showing that plaintiff's loss was the approximate result of defendants' negligence. 1 See Maryland Casualty Co. v. Price, 231 Fed. 397 (4th Cir.1916).
We reverse upon a holding that in ruling on a motion to dismiss, the fundamental question is whether the one making the allegations would by proving them thereby establish a cause of action against defendant. Copeland v. Celotex Corp., 447 So.2d 908 (Fla. 3rd DCA 1984). Construing this complaint most favorably to the pleader, it appears that a cause of action may exist. Vantage View, Inc. v. Bali East Development Corporation, 421 So.2d 728 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982).
There can be no question that one has a cause of action against an attorney who neglects to perform the services which he agrees to perform for a client or which by implication he agrees to perform when he accepts employment. Weekley v. Knight, 116 Fla. 721, 156 So. 625 (1934). Plaintiff here alleges that the employment of defendant attorneys was by an agreement to defend and try to settle or compromise the suit. It follows that there was a duty to inform the client of the failure of attempts to settle the suit. It is entirely possible that because plaintiff does not allege a meritorious defense, there was none. But this does not appear from the four corners of the complaint. See Hammonds v. Buckeye Cellulose Corp., 285 So.2d 7 (Fla.1973). Further, it does not follow that the absence of a defense to an action for foreclosure relieves an attorney who has accepted...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Resolution Trust Corp. v. Holland & Knight
...overruled on other grounds sub nom. State v. District Court of Appeal, First District, 569 So.2d 439 (Fla.1990); Dykema v. Godfrey, 467 So.2d 824, 825 (Fla. 1st DCA1985); Kartikes v. Demos, 214 So.2d 86, 86-87 (Fla. 3d DCA 1968). In addition, "the attorney is under a duty at all times to re......
-
Anderson v. Steven R. Andrews, P.A., 94-3148
...who neglects to perform the services he agreed, or implicitly agreed, to perform when he accepted the employment. Dykema v. Godfrey, 467 So.2d 824, 825 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985). Appellee's agreement to represent appellant with respect to both federal civil rights actions constituted an implicit ......
-
FDIC v. Martin
...(Fla. 3d DCA 1973). Further, a lawyer has an implicit duty to inform the client of matters material to representation. Dykema v. Godfrey, 467 So.2d 824 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985). The attorney client relationship does, as Plaintiff maintains, place a fiduciary duty on the part of the attorney. Arm......
-
Maillard v. Dowdell
...by proving the allegations in the complaint the plaintiff would establish a cause of action against the defendant. Dykema v. Godfrey, 467 So.2d 824 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985). We hold the trial court correctly concluded that plaintiffs had no cause of action against Plaintiffs alleged Dowdell was ......
-
Negligence cases
...1988). 5. Hatcher v. Roberts , 478 So.2d 1083, 1087 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985), rev. denied , 488 So.2d 68 (Fla. 1986). 6. Dykema v. Godfrey , 467 So.2d 824, 825 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985). 7. Drawdy v. Sapp , 365 So.2d 461, 462 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978). §2:20.1.2 Elements of Cause of Action — 2nd DCA A cause......
-
1-3 First Predicate: Attorney's Employment
...2d 86 (Fla. 3d Dist. Ct. App. 1968).[189] Kartikes v. Demos, 214 So. 2d 86, 86-87 (Fla. 3d Dist. Ct. App. 1968).[190] Dykema v. Godfrey, 467 So. 2d 824 (Fla. 1st Dist. Ct. App. 1985).[191] Dykema v. Godfrey, 467 So. 2d 824, 825 (Fla. 1st Dist. Ct. App. 1985).[192] Dykema v. Godfrey, 467 So.......
-
1-4 Second Predicate: Attorney's Neglect of a Reasonable Duty
...presented that attorneys neglected their reasonable duties or failed to act reasonably under the circumstances); Dykema v. Godfrey, 467 So. 2d 824 (Fla. 1st Dist. Ct. App. 1985); American Credit Card Tel. Co. v. National Pay Tel. Corp., 504 So. 2d 486 (Fla. 1st Dist. Ct. App. 1987) (complai......