# Locker v. United Pharmaceutical Group, Inc.

> District Court of Appeal of Florida · October 29, 2010 · 46 So. 3d 1126

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9783343

## Case

- **Full name:** Janice LOCKER, Appellant, v. UNITED PHARMACEUTICAL GROUP, INC., and Zenith Insurance Co., Appellees
- **Court:** District Court of Appeal of Florida
- **Decided:** October 29, 2010
- **Citations:** 46 So. 3d 1126; 2010 Fla. App. LEXIS 16531; 2010 WL 4273193
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Kahn
- **Judges:** Thomas, Van Nortwick, Kahn
- **Cited by:** 13 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9783343

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- noting that a trial court must accept all factual allegations in the four corners of an initial pleading as true and must construe those facts in a manner favorable to the filing party when considering a motion to dismiss

## Opinion text

KAHN, J.,
concurring.
I agree that we are required to reverse in this case. I do not, however, completely agree that a JCC, in reviewing a motion to dismiss, is quite as constrained as the majority opinion suggests. As we indicated in Brewer v. Clerk of Circuit of Court, Gadsden County, where the parties are in agreement, the trial court may treat “the hearing on the motion to dismiss as a summary judgment hearing.” 720 So.2d 602, 604 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998). In other words, the parties, by stipulation, may submit to the trial court at the motion-to-dismiss stage, a dispositive issue, even though that issue may rely, at least in part, upon non-record matters. Id. (“The issue of whether appellant had complied with the statutory prerequisite was thus tried by stipulation or consent of the parties.”); see also City of Clearwater v. U.S. Steel Corp., 469 So.2d 915, 916 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985) (“The parties, however, stipulated that the court could consider and take judicial notice of all other proceedings between them. The trial court therefore properly considered the issue of res judica-ta.”).
*1129 I believe, respectfully, that such flexibility is particularly appropriate in a workers’ compensation matter which, in many instances, will involve serial petitions for benefits, just as in the present case. The result reached by the majority is correct because we can easily glean from the transcript of the hearing in this case that counsel for appellant never agreed that the JCC could look beyond the four corners of the petition. Accordingly, and with this minor qualification, I concur.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9783343. Public record. Not legal advice.