Case ID: so2d_579/html/0414-02.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Rodolfo NODAL-TARAFA, Appellant, v. ARDC CORPORATION, Appellee.
    No. 90-2389.
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
    May 28, 1991.
    Guillermo F. Mascaro, Coral Gables, for appellant.
    Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft, James W. Beasley, Jr. and Steven M. Katzman, Palm Beach, for appellee.
    Before HUBBART, BASKIN and COPE, JJ.
   PER CURIAM.

The final order which dismisses with prejudice the plaintiff Rodolfo Nodal-Tara-fa’s claim for tortious interference with an employment relationship as contained in his third amended complaint is affirmed upon a holding that after being given numerous opportunities to amend, the plaintiff was unable to state any operative facts in the amended complaint detailing the specific acts the defendant ARDC Corporation [ARDC] allegedly committed which caused the plaintiff to be discharged as a real estate salesman for Arvida Realty Sales, Inc. Only ultimate legal conclusions are stated therein and such allegations are patently insufficient to state a cause of action against the defendant ARDC, Clark v. Boeing Co., 395 So.2d 1226, 1229 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981); Fla.R.Civ.P. 1.110(b).

Affirmed.