N.E. at West Palm Beach, Inc. v. Horowitz

Summary

The Florida Third District Court of Appeal held that a complaint adequately stated causes of action for breach of a sublease agreement and breach of fiduciary duty. The court reversed dismissal because, on a motion to dismiss, the court must consider only the four corners of the complaint and may not resolve affirmative defenses or evidentiary issues.

Holdings

1. The complaint stated a cause of action in count I for breach of the sublease agreement and therefore should not have been dismissed.
2. The complaint stated a cause of action in count II for breach of fiduciary duty and therefore should not have been dismissed.
3. A court deciding a motion to dismiss must determine whether the complaint alleges a good cause of action by looking strictly to the four corners of the complaint; it may not consider affirmative defenses or the sufficiency of evidence the plaintiff is likely to produce.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the complaint stated a cause of action for breach of the sublease agreement.
2. Whether the complaint stated a cause of action for breach of fiduciary duty.
3. Whether the trial court could consider affirmative defenses or the anticipated sufficiency of the plaintiff's evidence on a motion to dismiss.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded