Case Name: Rodolfo NODAL-TARAFA, Appellant, v. ARDC CORPORATION, Appellee
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1991-05-28
Citations: 579 So. 2d 414
Docket Number: No. 90-2389
Parties: Rodolfo NODAL-TARAFA, Appellant, v. ARDC CORPORATION, Appellee.
Judges: Before HUBBART, BASKIN and COPE, JJ.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 579
Pages: 414–414

Head Matter:
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.

Opinion:
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.