Vitola v. Paramount Automated Food Services, Inc.

Full title: CARLOS VITOLA, et al., Plaintiffs, v. PARAMOUNT AUTOMATED FOOD SERVICES…

Court: United States District Court, S.D. Florida

Date published: Apr 9, 2009

CASE NO. 08-61849-CIV-O'SULLIVAN, [CONSENT] (S.D. Fla. Apr. 9, 2009)

Opinion

CASE NO. 08-61849-CIV-O'SULLIVAN, [CONSENT].

April 9, 2009

ORDER

JOHN O'SULLIVAN, Magistrate Judge

THIS MATTER is before the Court on Defendants' Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs' Amended Complaint (DE# 35, 3/3/09) and Defendants' Motion for Summary Final Judgment (DE# 38, 3/17/09). Having reviewed the applicable filings and the law and for the reasons stated at the April 9, 2009 hearing, it is

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Defendants' Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs' Amended Complaint (DE# 35, 3/3/09) is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. The defendants' motion to dismiss is denied as to Counts I and II of the Amended Complaint. The Court finds that the plaintiffs have stated causes of action for Counts I and II and that the defendants raises issues that are outside the four-corners of the Amended Complaint. See St. George v. Pinellas County, 285 F.3d 1334, 1337 (11th Cir. 2002) (recognizing that a court's review on a motion to dismiss is limited to the four corners of the complaint). With respect to Count IV (fraud in the inducement), the Court finds that the plaintiffs have plead this claim with specificity in accordance with Fed.R.Civ.P. 9(b) and that the economic loss rule does not bar this claim. See Mizzaro v. Home Depot, Inc., 544 F. 3d 1230, 1237 (11th Cir. 2008) (setting forth requirements for satisfying Rule 9(b) pleading requirement); Indemnity Insurance Company of North America v. American Aviation, 891 So. 2d 532, 537 (Fla. 2004) (recognizing that fraud in the inducement as an exception to the economic loss rule). The defendants' motion to dismiss is granted as to the plaintiffs' state law minimum wage claim (Count III). This claim (Count III) is dismissed without prejudice. The plaintiff shall have until Monday, May 11, 2009 to file a Second Amended Complaint provided that the plaintiff has satisfied the notice requirement under Florida law. It is further

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Defendants' Motion for Summary Final Judgment (DE# 38, 3/17/09) is DENIED without prejudice to renew by Thursday, July 30, 2009. DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers at Miami, Florida.