Neurocare Institute of Central Florida, P.A. v. Screen, Inc. et al

Filing 30

ORDER denying 23 motion to dismiss. Signed by Judge Gregory A. Presnell on 11/20/2013. (JU)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
ORLANDO DIVISION
NEUROCARE INSTITUTE OF
CENTRAL FLORIDA, P.A.,
Plaintiff,
v.

Case No: 6:13-cv-1230-Orl-31DAB

SCREEN, INC., PIONEER HEALTH
ASSOCIATES, LLC, DEBORAH
ROBERTS and JOHN DOES 1-12,
Defendants.

ORDER
Upon consideration of Defendant Screen Inc.’s Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 23) and Plaintiff’s
response (Doc. 28), it is
ORDERED that said Motion is DENIED. A demand for return of property is not an
essential element of conversion under Florida law. Tambourine Comercio Internacional SA v.
Solowsky, 312 F. App’x 263, 272 (11th Cir. 2009) (“ ‘The generally accepted rule is that demand
and refusal are unnecessary where the act complained of amounts to a conversion regardless of
whether a demand is made.’ ” (quoting Goodrich v. Malowney, 157 So.2d 829, 832 (Fla. 2d DCA
1963))).
DONE and ORDERED in Chambers, Orlando, Florida on November 20, 2013.

Copies furnished to:
Counsel of Record
Unrepresented Party

-2-