Billy Lane adds another attorney to defense team in civil suit
Taking a look at the “DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS” in the civil action for the wrongful death of Gerald Morelock filed against Billy Lane, the motion is very basic in its composition.
The motion was filed by Jeffrey Vernis ESQ of the Palm Beach law firm Vernis & Bowling on October 26 with the Brevard County Clerks Office in Viera.
The case record now reflects that Billy Lane has added another attorney on his defense team in the civil action. Newly added attorney Terence R. Perkins is partner of a Daytona Beach law firm that handles both criminal, personal injury and insurance law.
There is still no attorney of record listed for DaimlerChrysler the other defendant named in the suit. However, the law firm of Vernis & Bowling does list DaimlerChrysler corporation as one of their clients. There has been no official statement released from the DaimlerChrysler corporation yet regarding the suit.
The attorney for the plaintiff, Dolores J. Morelock is Sammy S. Cacciatore JR of the Melbourne law firm Nance Cacciatore. Sammy S. Cacciatore filed a auto negligence suit against William D. Lane and the DaimlerChrysler corporation on October 2 for the wrongful death of Gerald V. Morelock. Mr. Morelock was killed on September 4 when the pickup Billy Lane was driving hit him head on while riding his 1983 Yamaha motor scooter. A crash report filed by the Florida Highway patrol stated that Billy Lane had crossed the double yellow lines on Highway A1A in an attempt to pass 3 vehicles. The report also found Billy Lane to be under the influence of an alcoholic beverage with a blood level of 0.192.
What you are about to read are lines taken from the actual motion to dismiss filed in the case. You will notice links on some of the legal terms by the difference in color of text. These links when clicked on will take you to the definition of that legal term to give you a better understanding of what this document is saying.
I have chose to use the law dictionary at www.law.com for this purpose, as I think that the definitions in their dictionary are more concise, yet easier to understand for the common layperson.
OK, so on with the motion:
1. This is a wrongful death action filed on behalf of the Plaintiff, resulting from an automobile accident, which occurred on or about September 4, 2006.
2. That Plaintiff’s complaint against this Defendant purportedly is predicated upon negligence, however, the Plaintiff has failed to state a cause for action for negligence.
3. That in count 1 of the Plaintiff’s complaint, the Plaintiff purportedly alleges a claim for negligence, however, no where within its count, except for the heading does it set forth the required elements of negligence, specifically: (1) a legal duty to protect the party seeking relief under the circumstances; and (2) negligent failure to comply with said duty.
4. In order to state a cause of action for negligence, the above two elements, together with an allegation that the injury to the party seeking relief was a result of the negligence, and a claim of damages must be pled. See Cintron V. Osmose Wood Preserving, 681. So2d 859, 861 (Fla. 5th DCA 1996).
Wherefore, the Defendant requests that this court enter an order dismissing Plaintiff’s Complaint against, Defendant, William D. Lane.
End of motion|
You are welcome to leave your comments and track-back to this article. This article is also open for discussion at
This article is public information. However, I work very hard transposing the text of other documents and formatting the article for this blog. Please, if you use this article on your site, give me the courtesy of giving a link back and credit. I have also added a PayPal donation button on the right lower navigation of this blog.
The time, travel and expense of the research for these articles have become very consuming. If you find them informative, please consider a donation in any amount you desire through PayPal.
People who looked at this item also looked at…
Related items
Related Posts:
November 9th, 2006 at 1:36 pm
Sandie:
You are correct, it was today at 9:00 am. However, Billy has waive his appearance for docket sounding and was not present.
The next docket sounding is in February and should be set for trial later on in the year.
I spoke to the SA and he said that typically these type of case run out about 18 months. I will have a small article to post later on today.
November 5th, 2006 at 3:20 pm
Good Grief!! How can Lane NOT BE NEGELENT?? Drunk and on the wrong side of the highway, not once but twice in a matter of a couple of months. Lawyers can really be anacondas in the woods. Lane knew he had no license to operate any motor vechile on the highway. Keep on top of this MIke.
November 9th, 2006 at 1:13 pm
When is the court appearance for Mr. Lane regarding the criminal charges?? For some reason, I thought that was today. Please advise. Looking forward to your update on Mr. Morelock’s family. Should have been a reporter Mike!!!!