Order | Filed: September 04, 2026
| Entered: September 04, 2026
Portalatin et al v. Rolling Loud, LLC et al
P.I.: Other | Florida Southern
Order on Motion to Dismiss
PAPERLESS ORDER denying 64 Defendants' Joint Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs' Second Amended Complaint ("Motion"). For the reasons stated on the record at the 83 Hearing, the Motion is DENIED.
Defendants' Motion argues that Plaintiffs' negligence counts impermissibly combine negligent hiring, retention, and supervision within general negligence counts. Mot. at 3-6. While the Court recognizes that allegations touching on these alternative negligence theories appear in the Complaint, the counts as structured are single counts for general negligence, parsed out as to each Defendant. Because Plaintiffs have represented in their Response and stipulated on the record at the Hearing that they intend to travel under a theory of general negligence only, the Court does not agree that "Defendants are unable to properly prepare a response to Plaintiffs' Second Amended Complaint or assert proper and adequate defenses[.]" Mot. at 5.
Further, the Court notes that theories that are part and parcel of Plaintiff's general negligence claims may be combined in a single count, and courts in this District have declined to disaggregate commingled allegations where the claim is otherwise adequately stated. See e.g., Doe v. Carnival Corp., 470 F. Supp. 3d 1317, 1324 (S.D. Fla. 2020) (complaint commingling negligent training and negligent monitoring was not a shotgun pleading where defendant "demonstrated its understanding of the elements of those... claims asserted against it"); Lopez v. City of Opa-Locka, No. 24-22076, 2024 WL 4212907, at *5 (S.D. Fla. Sept. 17, 2024) (though "Defendants object[ed] to Plaintiff combining her negligent training and supervision claims in Count VIII... [t]he Court [did] not find [] that Count VIII improperly commingles claims [because] [n]egligent training and negligent supervision are simply different theories for the claim of negligence."); Thomas v. Trench Training Sys., LLC, 377 So. 3d 198, 203 (Fla. 2d DCA 2023) (noting that "combining two theories of relief into one count is not a sufficient basis for dismissing a complaint").
As to Defendants' second argument that Defendants SFS and Rolling Loud should be dismissed from this action, on September 3, 2026, these Defendants filed a Notice of Withdrawal of Participation in Joint Motion to Dismiss and Joint Stipulation as to Deadline to Respond to Second Amended Complaint, [ECF No. 82], indicating their intention "to no longer pursue the arguments raised in the Joint Motion to Dismiss" and indicating their intent to answer the Complaint.
Accordingly, Defendants' Motion is DENIED. Defendants shall answer the Second Amended Complaint, [ECF No. 58], on or before September 11, 2026.
Signed by Judge Rodolfo A. Ruiz, II on 9/4/2026. (adn)