MARC PULEO v. ERIC A. JACOBS ( 2022 )


Menu:
  •       Third District Court of Appeal
    State of Florida
    Opinion filed November 30, 2022.
    Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
    ________________
    No. 3D22-516
    Lower Tribunal No. 21-14071
    ________________
    Marc Puleo,
    Appellant,
    vs.
    Eric A. Jacobs, et al.,
    Appellees.
    An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Alan Fine,
    Judge.
    Katzman Wasserman Bennardini & Rubinstein, P.A., and Steven M.
    Katzman, Charles J. Bennardini and Helaina Bardunias (Boca Raton), for
    appellant.
    Keller Landsberg, P.A., and Maria P. Gonzalez and Raymond L. Robin
    (Fort Lauderdale), for appellees.
    Before SCALES, LINDSEY and BOKOR, JJ.
    PER CURIAM.
    Affirmed. See Vorbeck v. Betancourt, 
    107 So. 3d 1142
    , 1148 (Fla. 3d
    DCA 2012) (“[T]he failure to raise an issue regarding an improper dismissal
    with prejudice at the trial level constitutes a waiver of this issue on appeal.”);
    K.R. Exch. Servs., Inc. v. Fuerst, Humphrey, Ittleman, PL, 
    48 So. 3d 889
    ,
    895 (Fla. 3d DCA 2010) (concluding that general allegations that the client’s
    attorneys “had a duty to perform the legal services with the diligence and
    level of care expected of similarly-situated attorneys in South Florida” failed
    to “sufficiently allege ultimate facts relating to . . . which duties were
    breached”); Bankers Tr. Realty, Inc. v. Kluger, 
    672 So. 2d 897
    , 898 (Fla. 3d
    DCA 1996) (recognizing that a claim for legal malpractice must allege
    ultimate facts “that support a causal connection between the acts the
    attorneys committed and the alleged damages suffered by the [client]”).
    2