From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Stringfellow v. Breidegam

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District
Mar 19, 1962
138 So. 2d 75 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1962)

Opinion

No. 61-422.

March 1, 1962. Rehearing Denied March 19, 1962.

Appeal from the Circuit Court, Dade County, John J. Kehoe, J.

Agronow Fensholt, Miami, for appellant.

Irving Steinhardt, Miami, for appellees.

Before PEARSON, TILLMAN, C.J., and HORTON and HENDRY, JJ.


Plaintiff's complaint alleging a conspiracy was dismissed and he appealed. The question presented is whether it stated a cause of action for civil conspiracy. We hold that it did not because the allegations purporting to state a cause of action in conspiracy must be clear, positive and specific. Gair v. Lockhart, Fla. 1950, 47 So.2d 826.

The complaint before us sought to imply a conspiracy from the discharge of the plaintiff who was employed for an indefinite term. Such a discharge is not prima facie illegal. Hope v. National Airlines, Fla.App. 1957, 99 So.2d 244.

Affirmed.


Summaries of

Stringfellow v. Breidegam

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District
Mar 19, 1962
138 So. 2d 75 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1962)
Case details for

Stringfellow v. Breidegam

Case Details

Full title:H.B. STRINGFELLOW, APPELLANT, v. DELIGHT R. BREIDEGAM, INDIVIDUALLY, I.J…

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District

Date published: Mar 19, 1962

Citations

138 So. 2d 75 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1962)

Citing Cases

DeMoya v. Mosely

Affirmed. See and compare Smith v. Piezo Technology and Professional Administrators, 427 So.2d 182 (Fla.…

Churruca v. Miami Jai-Alai, Inc.

Further, general allegations of conspiracy are inadequate; the allegations must be clear, positive and…