Ogden v. Defelice, 50 Fla.L.Weekly D937d (Fla. 5th DCA 2025), is a construction case that doesn’t talk about construction issues. Go figure. Nonetheless, it does touch upon two worthy considerations: (i) admissions in answers to lawsuits; and (ii) fictitious names. Both issues apply to construction disputes.
In this case, plaintiff sued a person d/b/a (doing business as) a fictitious company that focuses on kitchen countertops. After an amended complaint, the person filed an answer to the lawsuit that admitted the allegation regarding him doing business as a fictitious company. The case proceeded to a bench trial and the person got a judgment entered against him. The person later tried to vacate the judgment arguing that the judgment never should have been entered against him, but another company. This argument was rejected:
Admissions in pleadings “are accepted as facts without the necessity of supporting evidence. Phrased differently, a pleading admission has “ ‘the effect of withdrawing a fact from contention.’” It “release[s] the opposing party from its burden to prove” that fact.
Applying these principles, ]the person’s] “clear and unequivocal” answer to the amended complaint forecloses any notion that he is the wrong defendant. He “agree[d]” and “admit[ted]” that the parties formed a contract, that he received payment pursuant to the contract, and that he started work the following day. These binding admissions cannot be reconciled with his allegation — raised months after the trial — that another party was the correct defendant.
Ogden, supra (internal citations omitted).
Additionally, the appellate court noted if a person does business as a fictitious company, the judgment will be against the person, and it is not equivalent to piercing the corporate veil. “A fictitious name is just that — a fiction involving the name of the real party in interest, and nothing more. It has no independent legal existence. Therefore, as the trial court found, [t]here was no veil to pierce.” Ogden, supra (internal citations and quotations omitted).
Please contact David Adelstein at dadelstein@gmail.com or (954) 361-4720 if you have questions or would like more information regarding this article. You can follow David Adelstein on Twitter @DavidAdelstein1.