May v. Salter
| Decision Date | 11 June 2014 |
| Docket Number | No. 1D12–5519.,1D12–5519. |
| Parties | Geoffrey C.F. MAY, Appellant, v. James D. SALTER, as Former Trustee of the Jack C. May Trust, and Charles W. Littell, as Trustee of the Jack C. May Trust, Appellees. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Geoffrey C.F. MAY, Appellant,
v.
James D. SALTER, as Former Trustee of the Jack C. May Trust, and Charles W. Littell, as Trustee of the Jack C. May Trust, Appellees.
No. 1D12–5519.
District Court of Appeal of Florida,
First District.
May 12, 2014.
Rehearing Denied June 11, 2014.
Steven M. Chamberlain, Ocala, for Appellant.
Shannon M. Miller and Stan Cushman, Gainesville, and Jennifer Cates Lester of Dean Mead & Bovay, P.A., Gainesville, for Appellee.
PER CURIAM.
This appeal challenges an order dismissing the complaint of a trust beneficiary who challenges, among other things, a former trustee's Final Accounting of the trust. The trial court dismissed Mr. May's complaint on res judicata grounds. For the following reasons, we affirm in part and reverse in part.
“To rule on a motion to dismiss, a court's gaze is limited to the four corners of the complaint, including the attachments incorporated in it, and all well pleaded allegations are taken as true.” U.S. Project Mgmt., Inc. v. Parc Royale E. Dev., Inc., 861 So.2d 74, 76 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003). Typically affirmative defenses, like res judicata in this case, cannot be properly considered on a motion to dismiss. See, e.g., Calder Race Course, Inc. v. Dep't of Bus. & Prof'l Regulation, 838 So.2d 1241 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003) (reversing because “the affirmative defense of res judicata [was not] conclusively demonstrated within the four corners of the complaint”). There is an exception, however, when the face of the complaint and attachments demonstrate a defense's unquestionable merit. See, e.g., Duncan v. Prudential Ins. Co., 690 So.2d 687, 688 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997).
In this case, the trial court dismissed the complaint, finding that Mr. May's claims were “ res judicata on the face of the complaint.” On appeal, this court granted appellees' motion to take judicial notice of prior cases involving Mr. May, the trust, and the trustees, after no response to the motion was filed. 1See Lagarde v. Outdoor Resorts of Am., Inc., 428 So.2d 669, 670 (Fla. 2d DCA 1982) (taking judicial notice of the record and affirming a res judicata-based dismissal).
Upon review of the record, we can find no basis for concluding that Mr. May has already litigated claims alleging “deficiencies” in the former trustee's Final Accounting of the trust. See Compl. Count I, ¶¶ 12a–12f. In fact, the Final Accounting at issue here was not even completed until after the filing of the amended complaint in the previous...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Neapolitan Enters., LLC v. City of Naples
...to considering the four corners of the complaint along with the attachments incorporated into the complaint. Id.; May v. Salter, 139 So.3d 375, 376 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014). In the trial court and on appeal, the court must accept the allegations in the complaint as true. Hussey, 158 So.3d at 664......
-
Llanso v. WNF Law, P.L.
...that the action is barred by res judicata. Thews v. Wal-Mart Stores E., LP, 210 So. 3d 723, 724 (Fla. 2d DCA 2017) ; May v. Salter, 139 So. 3d 375, 376 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014) ; U.S. Project Mgmt., Inc. v. Parc Royale E. Dev., Inc., 861 So. 2d 74, 76 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003). In ruling on the motion......
-
Seminole Tribe of Fla. v. State
...affirmative defenses, like res judicata in this case, cannot be properly considered on a motion to dismiss.” May v. Salter, 139 So.3d 375, 376 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014). However, there is an exception to the rule when the prior litigation is plain from the face of the complaint and the party prop......
-
Bayview Loan Servicing, LLC v. Brown
...(Fla. 2d DCA 2016) (first citing Hussey v. Collier County , 158 So. 3d 661, 664 (Fla. 2d DCA 2014) ; and then citing May v. Salter , 139 So. 3d 375, 376 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014) ). "Normally affirmative defenses such as res judicata and collateral estoppel must be raised in an answer, not in a m......