From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Lisenbee v. Whitman

DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FIFTH DISTRICT
Aug 17, 2018
252 So. 3d 1280 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2018)

Opinion

Case No. 5D18-396

08-17-2018

Cory LISENBEE, Appellant, v. Dean WHITMAN, Appellee.

Cory Lisenbee, Lake Mary, pro se. Joseph S. Justice, of Ringer, Henry, Buckley & Seacord, PA, Orlando, for Appellee.


Cory Lisenbee, Lake Mary, pro se.

Joseph S. Justice, of Ringer, Henry, Buckley & Seacord, PA, Orlando, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

The trial court properly dismissed Appellant's amended complaint with prejudice. The applicable statute of limitations had run, and Appellant admittedly failed to comply or plead compliance with the mandatory presuit investigation and notice requirements set forth in chapter 766, Florida Statutes.

AFFIRMED.

ORFINGER, EVANDER and EDWARDS, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Lisenbee v. Whitman

DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FIFTH DISTRICT
Aug 17, 2018
252 So. 3d 1280 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2018)
Case details for

Lisenbee v. Whitman

Case Details

Full title:CORY LISENBEE, Appellant, v. DEAN WHITMAN, Appellee.

Court:DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FIFTH DISTRICT

Date published: Aug 17, 2018

Citations

252 So. 3d 1280 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2018)