Thompson v. Martin, 88-725
| Decision Date | 02 September 1988 |
| Docket Number | No. 88-725,88-725 |
| Citation | 13 Fla. L. Weekly 2066,530 So.2d 495 |
| Parties | 13 Fla. L. Weekly 2066 R.F. THOMPSON, Appellant, v. P.W. MARTIN, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
R.F. Thompson, pro se.
Kurt J. Bomar of Martin and Bomar, Chartered, Sarasota, for appellee.
The appellant, R.F. Thompson, challenges an order dismissing his second amended complaint with prejudice. We find that the appellant stated a cause of action for legal malpractice and, accordingly, reverse.
The appellant filed an action for legal malpractice against the appellee, P.W. Martin. The appellant's second amended complaint alleged in substance that the appellee, at the appellant's request, formally appeared as counsel of record in certain pending legal actions on behalf of the appellant but negligently allowed those actions to be dismissed for failure to prosecute. It was further alleged that the dismissals resulted in the appellant's claims being forever barred by the statute of limitations, and that as a direct and proximate result of the appellee's negligence, the appellant was damaged to the extent of the damages which could have been obtained in the dismissed lawsuits.
The appellee subsequently moved to dismiss the second amended complaint. The trial court granted the motion based upon its finding that the appellant failed to state a cause of action, and it entered an order dismissing the action with prejudice. This timely appeal followed.
Although the appellant's complaint was not a model pleading, we find that it adequately stated a cause of action and was, therefore, improperly dismissed. In order to state a cause of action, a complaint need only contain a short and plain statement as to the ultimate facts which indicate that the pleader is entitled to relief. Fla.R.Civ.P. 1.110(b). Furthermore, in determining whether a complaint states a cause of action, this court must assume that all of the facts alleged in the complaint are true and must draw all reasonable inferences in favor of the pleader. Bolton v. Smythe, 432 So.2d 129 (Fla. 5th DCA), review denied, 440 So.2d 353 (Fla.1983).
A cause of action for legal malpractice has three elements: (1) the attorney's employment and (2) his neglect of a reasonable duty, which (3) is the proximate cause of loss to the client. Hatcher v. Roberts, 478 So.2d 1083 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985), review denied, 488 So.2d 68 (Fla.1986); Weiner v. Moreno, 271 So.2d 217 (Fla. 3d DCA 1973). Considering the allegations of the second amended complaint in a light most favorable to the appellant and drawing all reasonable inferences therefrom, we find that the required elements of a legal malpractice action were alleged. See, e.g., Dykema v. Godfrey, 467 So.2d 824 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985). Thus, the trial court...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Jones v. Law Firm of Hill and Ponton
...damage to the plaintiff. Bill Branch Chevrolet, Inc. v. Philip L. Burnett, P.A., 555 So.2d 455, 455 (Fla.App.1990); Thompson v. Martin, 530 So.2d 495, 496 (Fla.App.1988). An attorney's reasonable duties require an attorney to have the knowledge and skill necessary to confront the circumstan......
-
Vienneau v. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co.
...210 (Fla.1965). See also City of Gainesville Code Enforcement Board v. Lewis, 536 So.2d 1148 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988); Thompson v. Martin, 530 So.2d 495 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988). Florida has long adhered to the rule that an employment contract which does not provide for a definite term of employment i......
-
Resolution Trust Corp. v. Holland & Knight
...a loss to the client. Bill Branch Chevrolet, Inc. v. Philip L. Burnett, P.A., 555 So.2d 455, 455 (Fla. 2d DCA1990); Thompson v. Martin, 530 So.2d 495, 496 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988). An attorney's reasonable duties include the duty of care, which requires an attorney to have the knowledge and skill......
-
Jones v. Law Firm of Hill and Ponton
...Bill Branch Chevrolet, Inc. v. Philip L. Burnett, P.A., 555 So.2d 455, 455 (Fla.App.2d Dist.Ct.App.1990); Thompson v. Martin, 530 So.2d 495, 496 (Fla.App.2d Dist.Ct.App.1988). An attorney must have the knowledge and skill necessary to confront the circumstances of each case. See, e.g., Bill......
-
Negligence cases
...365 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988). 6. Stake v. Harlan , 529 So.2d 1183, 1186 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988) (See concurring opinion). 7. Thompson v. Martin , 530 So.2d 495, 496 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988). §2:20.1.3 Elements of Cause of Action — 3rd DCA It is well settled that a cause of action for legal malpractice has t......
-
1-2 Complaint
...The Sondermanns also claim that they suffered loss as a result. Count I satisfies . . . Faro's . . . challenge."); Thompson v. Martin, 530 So. 2d 495 (Fla. 2d Dist. Ct. App. 1988) (a complaint need only indicate that a cause of action exists and need not anticipate affirmative defenses); Ba......
-
1-1 Introduction
...v. Rogow, 2019 WL 1112293 (S.D. Fla. 2019); Larson & Larson, P.A. v. TSE Indus., Inc., 22 So. 3d 36 (Fla. 2009); Thompson v. Martin, 530 So. 2d 495 (Fla. 2d Dist. Ct. App. 1988); Olmsted v. Emmanuel, 783 So. 2d 1122 (Fla. 1st Dist. Ct. App. 2001); Kates v. Robinson, 786 So. 2d 61 (Fla. 4th ......