Wilson v. Edenfield
District Court, M.D. Florida
1Opinion of the Court
KOVACHEVICH, District Judge.
ORDER ON DEFENDANTS’, MICHAEL S. EDENFIELD AND BATTLE & EDENFIELD, P.A., MOTION TO DISMISS PLAINTIFFS’ AMENDED COMPLAINT
This cause is before the Court on Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss (Dkt.18) and Plaintiffs’ response (Dkt.24).
STANDARD OF REVIEW
Under Conley v. Gibson, a district court should not dismiss a complaint “for failure to state a claim unless it appears beyond a doubt that the plaintiff can prove no set of facts” that would entitle the plaintiff to relief. 355 U.S. 41, 45, 78 S.Ct. 99, 101-02, 2 L.Ed.2d 80 (1957); see also Bracewell v. Nicholson Air…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Conley v. GibsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
- Scheuer v. RhodesSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
- Rickman v. Precisionaire, Inc.District Court, M.D. Florida · 1995
- Executive 100, Inc. v. Martin CountyCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1991
- Blumel v. MylanderDistrict Court, M.D. Florida · 1996
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Metcalf v. Beverly Health & Rehabilitation Services, Inc.District Court, N.D. Florida · 1999