Varnes v. Dawkins, 92-1542

Decision Date14 September 1993
Docket NumberNo. 92-1542,92-1542
Citation624 So.2d 349
Parties18 Fla. L. Weekly D2028 Imogene VARNES, Appellant, v. Donald Ray DAWKINS, Appellee.
CourtFlorida District Court of Appeals

Michael Bowlus, Crabtree, Ford & Jeter, P.A., Jacksonville, for appellant.

Gary Baker, Callahan, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Appellant, Imogene Varnes, appeals the trial court's order dismissing with prejudice her complaint claiming equitable title to certain real property due to appellee Donald Ray Dawkins' failure to reconvey said property to appellant pursuant to an alleged oral agreement to that effect. We reverse and remand.

On January 24, 1992, appellant Imogene Varnes filed a five count amended complaint alleging the following:

On or about January 28, 1988, appellant and her husband, Samuel R. Varnes, conveyed by warranty deed certain real property owned by them to Samuel's son, Donald Ray Dawkins. Appellant alleged that the conveyance was made without consideration 1 and upon the express oral agreement that Donald Dawkins would reconvey the property to appellant or Samuel Varnes without further consideration upon demand by either appellant or her husband, Samuel R. Varnes. The conveyance to Donald Dawkins reserved unto each of the grantors (Samuel and Imogene Varnes) a life estate in the subject property while acknowledging that the property was encumbered by a life estate superior to Samuel R. Varnes' interest in the property. 2 Samuel R. Varnes died on November 7, 1988, leaving a will which left all assets, real and personal, to appellant. The complaint further alleged that appellant is the present owner of the subject property (encumbered only by the aforementioned life estate).

Appellant further alleged that she had demanded reconveyance of the subject property from appellee who has refused to reconvey the property to her, and that Donald Dawkins resides in the subject property pursuant to an oral agreement with appellant providing for payment of rent, but has failed and refused to pay the agreed upon rental fee. The complaint sets forth five counts for relief under various equitable theories arguing for the rescission of the conveyance to Dawkins, imposition of a constructive trust for the benefit of appellant, and demanding payment for the value of the unpaid rent.

Appellee Dawkins moved to dismiss the amended complaint for failure to state a cause of action, arguing that appellant never owned any interest in the property until January 28, 1988, when a life estate was created for her; that the alleged oral agreement to reconvey the property to appellant is violative of the statute of frauds; that there is no provision at law for the specific enforcement of an express oral agreement to reconvey property; and that appellant does not have an equitable interest in the property.

It is apparent to us that the trial court, in granting appellee's motion to dismiss, placed undue reliance on appellee's factual assertion that appellant owned no interest in the subject property until January 28, 1988, when Samuel Varnes created a life estate for her. According to appellee's theory, appellant could not have been fraudulently induced into signing the warranty deed conveying the property to appellee because appellant at the time of the conveyance had no legal interest in the subject property. According to appellee, any oral representation that appellee would reconvey the property to appellant upon demand could not inure to appellant's benefit since she had no legal right to convey the property in the first instance.

In relying upon the factual assertions of appellee's motion to dismiss, the trial court abused its discretion. The function of a motion to dismiss is to raise as a question of law the sufficiency of the facts alleged to state a cause of action. Connolly v. Sebeco, Inc., 89 So.2d 482 (Fla.1956); P.P. Fish v. Post of Amvets # 85, 560 So.2d 337 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990). In determining the sufficiency of the complaint, the trial court may not look beyond the four corners of the complaint, consider any affirmative defenses raised by the defendant, nor consider any evidence likely to be produced by either side. Martin v. Principal Mutual Life Ins. Co., 557 So.2d 128 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990); Lewis State Bank v. Travelers Ins. Co., 356 So.2d 1344 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978). Significantly, all material factual allegations of the complaint...

To continue reading

Request your trial
18 cases
  • Andrews v. Florida Parole Com'n
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • October 18, 2000
    ...four corners of the complaint. See Brewer v. Clerk of the Circuit Court, 720 So.2d 602, 603 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998); Varnes v. Dawkins, 624 So.2d 349, 350 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993). A reviewing court operates under the same constraints. See Rittman, 727 So.2d at 393; McKinney-Green, Inc. v. Davis, 60......
  • City of Gainesville v. STATE, DOT
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • March 5, 2001
    ...See Brewer v. Clerk of the Circuit Court, 720 So.2d 602, 603 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998); Sarkis, 697 So.2d at 526; Varnes v. Dawkins, 624 So.2d 349, 350 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993). "A reviewing court operates under the same constraints. See Rittman, 727 So.2d at 393; McKinney-Green, Inc. v. Davis, 606 So......
  • Key v. Trattmann
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • May 25, 2007
    ...but arises by implication of law." Frank, 13 So.2d at 217-18 (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). See Varnes v. Dawkins, 624 So.2d 349, 351 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993) ("[A]n oral agreement to reconvey property is enforceable because the statute of frauds does not apply to trusts arisin......
  • Hastings v. Demming
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • July 31, 1996
    ...however, a trial court is constrained by well-settled precedent from resolving factual disputes. See, e.g., Varnes v. Dawkins, 624 So.2d 349, 350 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993) (in ruling on motion to dismiss, trial court must accept material allegations of complaint as true and may not consider affir......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
1 books & journal articles
  • Business & commercial cases
    • United States
    • James Publishing Practical Law Books Florida Causes of Action
    • April 1, 2022
    ..., 148 Fla. 408, 4 So.2d 532 (1941), and cases cited therein; Williams v. Grogan , 100 So.2d 407 (Fla.1958); and Varnes v. Dawkins , 624 So.2d 349 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993). This exception to the parol evidence rule is consistent with and may well have emanated from our statute of frauds which spe......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT