From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Rennoc v. Merica, Burch Dickerson

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District
Nov 30, 2005
914 So. 2d 1107 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2005)

Opinion

No. 4D04-4949.

November 30, 2005.

Appeal from the Circuit Court, Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, Broward County, Patti Englander Henning, J.

J. Scott Gunn of J. Scott Gunn, P.A., Fort Lauderdale, for appellant.

Patrick P. Coll of Bedell, Dittmar, DeVault, Pillans Coxe, P.A., Jacksonville, for appellee.


We reverse an order dismissing Rennoc's complaint with prejudice.

The trial court looked outside the four corners of the complaint in finding that the contracts at issue were executed in Nevada. The applicable law is significant here. If Nevada law applies, the six-month limitation period placed in these contracts may be valid, while if Florida law applies, it is undisputed that the parties' contractual reduction of the limitations period is invalid. § 95.03, Fla. Stat.

The complaint's factual allegations must be taken as true and all inferences construed favorably to the plaintiff, Rennoc, as non-moving party. Atkins v. Topp Telecom, Inc., 873 So.2d 397, 398 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004). The trial court's finding that the complaint was executed in Nevada required an inferential step that was not in favor of Rennoc. As a result, dismissal is improper. We remand for further proceedings.

STONE, GROSS and HAZOURI, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Rennoc v. Merica, Burch Dickerson

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District
Nov 30, 2005
914 So. 2d 1107 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2005)
Case details for

Rennoc v. Merica, Burch Dickerson

Case Details

Full title:RENNOC, INC., a Florida corporation, d/b/a Universal Data Systems…

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District

Date published: Nov 30, 2005

Citations

914 So. 2d 1107 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2005)

Citing Cases

Rhiner v. Koyama

"The purpose of a motion to dismiss is to test the legal sufficiency of [the] complaint, not to determine…