A Florida court has reversed a lower court's decision to dismiss a lawsuit filed by A Advocates & Attorneys of Kennedy Law Group against Vicki Uiterwyk and Swope, Rodante, P.A. The lawsuit, which centers around allegations of tortious interference with business relationships, will now proceed to further legal proceedings. This ruling is significant for the Kennedy Law Group as it allows them to continue their pursuit of legal remedies for what they claim to be unjust actions by the defendants.
The District Court of Appeal of Florida issued its ruling on May 29, 2026, in case number 2D2025-1242. The court found that the lower court had improperly considered information outside of the complaint when it dismissed the case with prejudice. This decision impacts not only the Kennedy Law Group but also the broader legal landscape regarding tortious interference claims in Florida.
Background
The parties involved in this case are A Advocates & Attorneys of Kennedy Law Group, also known as Kennedy Law Group, and Vicki S. Uiterwyk, along with her law firm, Swope, Rodante, P.A. The dispute arose from a series of referral and contingency agreements that Kennedy Law Group had with clients in tobacco litigation cases. These agreements entitled Kennedy Law Group to a share of any recovery from cases they referred to Uiterwyk's husband's firm, Hendrik Uiterwyk, P.A.
Kennedy Law Group alleged that Uiterwyk and Swope interfered with these agreements by transferring, dismissing, or terminating representation in those cases without consulting them. The situation escalated when Uiterwyk's husband suffered a stroke and later passed away, leading to Uiterwyk taking over the administrative duties of her husband's firm. The complaint claimed that Uiterwyk and Swope acted unjustly by giving away cases to other firms, which Kennedy Law Group argued harmed their business.
The Ruling
The court's ruling focused on the procedural aspects of the case, particularly the trial court's decision to dismiss the complaint. The trial court had granted the motion to dismiss based on information that was not included in the original complaint, specifically a durable power of attorney that Uiterwyk presented after the initial hearing. The District Court of Appeal stated, "the trial court commits reversible error in dismissing the complaint based on those extraneous matters." This indicates that the court emphasized the importance of adhering to the facts presented within the complaint itself.
The appellate court found that Kennedy Law Group had adequately pleaded a claim for tortious interference. The elements of such a claim include the existence of a business relationship, knowledge of that relationship by the defendant, intentional and unjustified interference, and damages resulting from that interference. The court noted that the trial court had improperly concluded that Uiterwyk's actions were justified based on the durable power of attorney, which was not part of the original complaint.
Impact
This ruling has significant implications for Kennedy Law Group as they can now continue their legal battle against Uiterwyk and Swope. The court's decision reinforces the principle that judges must limit their review to the allegations contained within the complaint when considering motions to dismiss. This is crucial for plaintiffs, as it ensures that their claims are evaluated based on the facts they present, rather than extraneous information that may come to light later.
The ruling also serves as a reminder to legal practitioners about the importance of adhering to procedural rules in civil litigation. It emphasizes that any defenses or justifications raised by defendants must be apparent from the original complaint to be considered at the motion to dismiss stage. This could set a precedent for future cases involving tortious interference claims, potentially making it more difficult for defendants to dismiss such claims based on outside information.
What's Next
The Kennedy Law Group's case will now return to the lower court for further proceedings. The court's reversal of the dismissal means that the lawsuit will continue, and both parties will have the opportunity to present their arguments and evidence. It remains to be seen whether Uiterwyk and Swope will appeal this decision or if there are related cases pending that could impact the outcome of this dispute.