Legal Opinion

Lanier v. Poppell

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided May 26, 1978No. 78-218PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

DANAHY, Judge.

The question before us is the sufficiency of the allegations of an amended complaint seeking enforcement of an oral agreement to devise real property. The trial judge found the amended complaint sufficient to withstand a motion to dismiss. We reverse.

The following is a summary of the essential facts alleged in the amended complaint:

1. In 1947, appellee/plaintiff (Popped) entered into an oral agreement with his uncle, now deceased (the decedent), under which Popped agreed to render certain services to the decedent during the decedent’s lifetime in return for the decedent’s…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Hooks v. BridgewaterTexas Supreme Court · 1921
  2. Battle, Et Vir. v. ButlerSupreme Court of Florida · 1939
  3. Avery v. Marine Bank & Trust Co.District Court of Appeal of Florida · 1968
  4. Binninger v. HutchinsonDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1978

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Cavallaro v. Stratford Homes, Inc.District Court of Appeal of Florida · 2001
  2. Renfro v. DodgeDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1988

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API