HomeMy WebLinkAbout0085 ,
y
. i
complaint was subsec~uently amended, adding the church as a party -
defendant. Plai~tiff then settled with the church for seven hundred ~
flfty dollars, and a final judgment was entered for the church based ~
l
. ,
upon a written release executed by plaintiff. 'Ihe defendants Reeds
and Hanover then moved for leave to file a third party oomplaint
against the church seeking contribution from the church and its
insurer. The motion was granted and ev~entually the Reeds and
.
;
Hanover ~led a third party oomplaint (second amended) against the
~
church and its insurer. The third party compla.int alleged that the
. church had a duty to supervise and had failed to supervise the children -
attending the activity at the Reeds' home, and as a result, James
Sampson was fatally injured. The church then moved to strike and to-- -
~
dismiss the third party complaint based upon a release earlier granted
to thg church by Sampson. The motion to dismiss was granted, and
Snal judgment for the church was entered. This appeal by the defen-
dants, Reed and Hanover, then followed.
The function of a motfon to dismiss a complaint is to raise .
, quest~on of law as to the sufficiency of the facts alleged to state a
~ . .
i cause of action. It is axiomatic that a court may not praperly go
i . . .
beyond the four oorners of the complaint in testing the legal suf~icfency
of the allegatfons set forth therefn. Geer v. Bennett, 237 So. 2d 311
~ (Fla. 4th DCA 1970). Where a motion to dismiss a complaint rests on
facts outside the scope of the allegations contained in the complaint, _
the trial court commits reversible error in dismissing the complaint
b~sed on those extraneous matters. Tiseo v. Arnold, 237 So. 2d 21
(Fla. 2d DCA 1970). -
~ _ In the instant case, the third party defendants moved to
~ ~ _
~ dismiss the third party complaint upon the grounds that the third party
~
defendant had received a general release from the plaintiff which
-2-
: a~ 275 ~~E 85
~
- - ~ _ _ - -
~~Y..~:~~ . . . _