Case Name: Carl H. STEARNS, Jr., d/b/a Carl & Jeannie's Trucking and Landscaping, Appellants, v. STEARNS PEAT CO., INC., Kenneth F. Stearns and Kathryn P. Stearns, Appellees
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 2000-06-07
Citations: 760 So. 2d 255
Docket Number: No. 2D99-3763
Parties: Carl H. STEARNS, Jr., d/b/a Carl & Jeannie’s Trucking and Landscaping, Appellants, v. STEARNS PEAT CO., INC., Kenneth F. Stearns and Kathryn P. Stearns, Appellees.
Judges: SALCINES, J„ and DANAHY, PAUL W., (Senior) Judge, Concur.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 760
Pages: 255–255

Head Matter:
Carl H. STEARNS, Jr., d/b/a Carl & Jeannie’s Trucking and Landscaping, Appellants, v. STEARNS PEAT CO., INC., Kenneth F. Stearns and Kathryn P. Stearns, Appellees.
No. 2D99-3763.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.
June 7, 2000.
Thomas John Dandar of Dandar & Dan-dar, P.A., Tampa, for Appellants.
Ronda S. Tranter of Schrader, Johnson, Auvil & Brock, P.A., Dade City, for Appel-lees.

Opinion:
CASANUEVA, Acting Chief Judge.
In this dispute between the plaintiff landscaping company and the defendant soil supplier, we affirm the dismissal with prejudice of counts I and III of the plaintiffs third amended complaint. The plaintiff was afforded generous guidance and ample opportunity to plead a cause of action for tortious interference with contract or with business relationship and failed to do so. See Gladstone v. Smith, 729 So.2d 1002 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999). We find, however, that count II of the third amended complaint does state a cause of action for breach of contract and should not have been dismissed with prejudice. Accordingly, we affirm in part, reverse in part, and remand this matter to the trial court for reinstatement of count II of the third amended complaint.
SALCINES, J" and DANAHY, PAUL W., (Senior) Judge, Concur.