Carolyn Banks v. Alachua County School Board , 275 So. 3d 214 ( 2019 )


Menu:
  •          FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL
    STATE OF FLORIDA
    _____________________________
    No. 1D18-2128
    _____________________________
    CAROLYN BANKS,
    Appellant,
    v.
    ALACHUA COUNTY SCHOOL
    BOARD,
    Appellee.
    _____________________________
    On appeal from the Circuit Court for Alachua County.
    Monica J. Brasington, Judge.
    June 24, 2019
    PER CURIAM.
    Carolyn Banks appeals from an order dismissing with
    prejudice her two-count complaint against the Alachua County
    School Board. We affirm the dismissal of Count 2 of her complaint
    without comment. We reverse the portion of the trial court’s order
    dismissing Count 1 of her complaint with prejudice.
    Dismissal of a complaint with prejudice is a severe sanction to
    be used in limited circumstances. Obenschain v. Williams, 
    750 So. 2d
    771, 772-73 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000) (holding a complainant should
    generally be given leave to amend a defective complaint except
    where the complaint fails to state a cause of action, and it
    “conclusively appears that there is no possible way to amend the
    complaint to state a cause of action”); McAlpin v. Roberts, 
    195 So. 3d
    1197, 1199 (Fla. 1st DCA 2016) (reversing an order dismissing
    a complaint with prejudice and remanding with instructions to
    allow the appellants an opportunity to amend). In moving to
    dismiss, the school board argued the complaint was time-barred by
    the applicable statute of limitations and the complaint failed to
    state a cause of action.
    A motion to dismiss based on the expiration of a statute of
    limitations should be granted only in “extraordinary
    circumstances” when the facts constituting the defense
    affirmatively appear on the face of the complaint and its
    attachments conclusively establish that the action is barred.
    Goodwin v. Sphatt, 
    114 So. 3d 1092
    , 1094 (Fla. 2d DCA 2013)
    (citation omitted).    The instant case is not one of those
    extraordinary circumstances as the complaint raised sufficient
    facts to preclude dismissal on this basis.
    In determining whether a complaint states a cause of action
    upon which relief can be granted, our review is confined to the four
    corners of the complaint and its attachments.             Universal
    Underwriters Ins. Co. v. Body Parts of Am., Inc., 
    228 So. 3d 175
    ,
    176 (Fla. 1st DCA 2017) (quoting Sobi v. Fairfield Resorts, Inc.,
    
    846 So. 2d 1204
    , 1206-07 (Fla. 5th DCA 2003)). We must draw all
    inferences in favor of the complainant and accept as true all well-
    pleaded allegations. 
    Id. Considering the
    complaint’s allegations
    in the light most favorable to Ms. Banks, we find she stated a cause
    of action for contract reformation and raised factual issues to
    withstand the motion to dismiss. Accordingly, we reverse the
    portion of the order dismissing Count 1 with prejudice and remand
    for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.
    AFFIRMED in part, REVERSED in part, and REMANDED.
    ROBERTS, RAY, AND JAY, J.J., concur.
    2
    _____________________________
    Not final until disposition of any timely and
    authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or
    9.331.
    _____________________________
    Eric Jacob Lindstrom of Egan, Lev, Lindstrom & Siwica, P.A.,
    Orlando, for Appellant.
    David M. Delaney, Jamie L. White, and Natasha Mickens of Dell
    Salter, P.A., Gainesville, for Appellee.
    3
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 18-2128

Citation Numbers: 275 So. 3d 214

Filed Date: 6/24/2019

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 6/24/2019