claim under section 376.313(3), Florida Statutes (2002). The trial court held a bench trial. The court recognized that contamination of Ea-ston’s property had diminished its value by $153,000. It concluded, however, that Easton had failed to prove that either Ara-mark or Servisco had caused the contamination, and thus entered judgment in Ara-mark’s favor. On appeal, the First District Court of Appeal reversed, holding that section 376.313(3) created a cause of action for strict liability against an adjoining landowner and did not require proof that the defendant had caused the contamination. See Easton, 825 So.2d at 998. The court relied on two other cases holding that section 376.313 creates a cause of action. See Cunningham v. Anchor Hocking Corp., 558 So.2d 93, 98-99 (Fla. 1st DCA) (<HOLDING>), review denied, 574 So.2d 139 (Fla.1990);
holding that the allegations in the complaint stated a cause of action under section 376313 recognizing cause of action holding that a title vii cause of action is limited to those discrimination allegations in the complaint that have been under the scrutiny of a formal eeoc complaint recognizing the cause of action holding that a real estate brokers allegations of an oral contract with prospective purchasers stated a cause of action