The court is not trying to decide the truth of any factual issues in the case. When deciding on a 2-615 motion to dismiss, the court will construe the Complaint liberally and view the allegations in the light most favorable to the plaintiff. Ginzburg, 43 NY2d 268, on a motion to dismiss made pursuant to CPLR 3211(a)(7), “the sole criterion is whether the pleading states a cause of action, and if from its four corners factual allegations are discerned which taken together manifest any cause of action cognizable at law.” Further, “when evidentiary material is considered, the criterion is whether the proponent of the pleading has a cause of action, not whether he has stated one, and unless it has been shown that a material fact as claimed by the pleader to be one is not a fact at all and unless it can be said that no significant dispute exists regarding it, again dismissal should not eventuate.” Guggenheimer, supra at 275. A 2-615 Motion to Dismiss will result in her case being dismissed. As the Court of Appeals enunciated in Guggenheimer v. Essentially, the court should impose a “four corners” test in liberally construing the four corners of the pleading to see whether they establish valid causes of action. These facts amply support the causes of action alleged in the Complaint.

The Complaint in this action makes factual allegations which, for the most part, have already been established by the Order. exercise its discretion and grant your motion.16 Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) permits a party to ask the court to dismiss a case for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. In deciding such a motion, the court must accept the facts as alleged in the Complaint as true, according the plaintiff the benefit of every possible favorable inference, and determine only whether the facts as alleged fit within any cognizable legal theory. In an action, a Defendant can move to dismiss a Plaintiff’s Complaint based upon the allegation that the Complaint fails to state a cause of action, pursuant to CPLR 3211(a)(1), (5) and (7). As this article will explain, the Florida courts should formally recognize Twombly’s plausibility test as the motion to dismiss standard because the text of rule 1.110 requires it and many Florida courts are applying the functional equivalent of it.

Motion to dismiss standard