DONNA D. SNYDER, APPELLANT,
v.
CHEEZEM DEVELOPMENT CORP., A FLORIDA CORPORATION, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
Snyder sought to enforce a contract for the sale of a condominium unit against Cheezem Development Corporation. The trial court granted summary judgment for Cheezem, but the appellate court reversed, holding that a material ambiguity in the contract regarding the identity of the seller precluded summary judgment and required trial.
Summary judgment was improper because the contract contained a material ambiguity as to the identity of the seller between the language on the first page and the execution on the second page. This ambiguity must be resolved by the trier of fact at trial, and summary judgment is inappropriate in cases involving such material ambiguities in written instruments.
[1] Summary judgment is improper if the record reflects the existence of any genuine issue of material fact, or the possibility of any issue, or if the record raises even the…
[2] The burden is on the moving party to demonstrate conclusively that the nonmoving party cannot prevail on a motion for summary judgment.
Previewing 2 of 4 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“The burden is on the moving party to demonstrate conclusively that the nonmoving party cannot prevail.”
Establishes the stringent standard for summary judgment in Florida
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceSnyder and Cheezem (or its subsidiary American Design and Development Corporation) entered into a written contract for the sale of a condominium unit.…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Genuine Issue Of Material Fact cases and more on FLexlaw
SCHEB, Judge.
Appellant contends that entry of a summary judgment was improper because there existed a genuine issue of material fact. We agree and reverse.
Donna D. Snyder, plaintiff, sued defendant, Cheezem Development Corporation, for breach of a contract allegedly between Snyder and Cheezem whereby Cheezem agreed to sell Snyder a condominium unit. The contract named Cheezem as the “seller” on the first page, but was executed on the second page by American Design and De velopment Corporation, a wholly owned subsidiary of Cheezem.
Cheezem admitted the existence of the contract in its initial pleadings. Following a change of counsel, however, Cheezem moved to amend its pleadings. The motion was granted and Cheezem, by its amended answer, denied that there was a contract between it and Snyder, alleging instead that the contract was between Snyder and American. Cheezem then moved for summary judgment, attaching affidavits to its motion from its corporate officers. The affidavits indicated that there was no deposit recorded on Cheezem’s books for the transaction, and that American was an independent entity, even though wholly owned by Cheezem, and had executed the contract on its own behalf and not as an agent of Cheezem. Snyder did not file counteraffidavits. The trial court granted final summary judgment for Cheezem.
A party to a civil suit is entitled to summary judgment only “if the pleadings, depositions, answers to interrogatories and admissions on file together with the affidavits, if any, show that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and that the moving party is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law.” Fla.R.Civ.P. 1.510(c). The burden is on the moving party to demonstrate conclusively that the nonmoving party cannot prevail. Visingardi v. Tirone, 193 So. 2d 601 (Fla.1966); Holl v. Talcott, 191 So. 2d 40 (Fla.1966). If the record reflects the existence of any genuine issue of material fact, or the possibility of any issue, or if the record raises even the slightest doubt that an issue might exist, summary judgment is improper. Mejiah v. Rodriguez, 342 So. 2d 1066 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977); see Visingardi v. Tirone, 193 So. 2d 601 (Fla.1966).
In the Snyder contract, there is an ambiguity as to the identity of the seller between the language on page one and the execution on page two. The trier of fact should resolve that ambiguity at trial. Although suits on written instruments often lend themselves to summary judgment, such a procedure is improper where, as here, the written instrument contains a material ambiguity. Westchester Fire Insurance Co. v. In-Sink-Erator, 252 So. 2d 856 (Fla. 4th DCA 1971); Commercial Trading Co. v. Zero Food Storage, Inc., 199 So. 2d 109 (Fla. 3d DCA 1967).
We reverse and remand for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.
HOBSON, Acting C. J., and RYDER, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (80 total)
-
Hervey v. Alfonso, 650 So. 2d 644 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995)…rs to interrogatories, and admissions, on file, together with affidavits, if any, show that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and that the moving party is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law. E.g., Snyder v. Cheezem Dev. Corp., 373 So. 2d 719 (Fla. 2d DCA 1979). The party moving for summary judgment has the bur [*646] den of establishing irrefutably that the non-moving party cannot prevail. E.g., Gomes v. Stevens, 548 So. 2d 1163 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989). Furthermore, it is only after the movi…
-
Gomes v. Stevens, 548 So. 2d 1163 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989)…material fact and that the moving party is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law. Fla.R.Civ.P. 1.510(c). The burden, furthermore, is on the movant to demonstrate conclusively that the nonmoving party cannot prevail. Snyder v. Ckeezem Dev. Corp., 373 So. 2d 719 (Fla. 2d DCA 1979). See also Holl v. Talcott, 191 So. 2d 40 (Fla.1966). If the record reflects the existence of any genuine issue of material fact, or the possibility of any issue, or if the record raises even the slightest doubt that an issue might…
-
Wilson v. Woodward, 602 So. 2d 547 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992)…d reflects the existence of any genuine issue of material fact, or the possibility of any issue, or if the record raises even the slightest doubt that an issue might exist, summary judgment should not be granted. Gomes; Snyder v. Cheezem Dev. Corp., 373 So. 2d 719 (Fla. 2d DCA1979). Mr. Woodward did not carry this heavy burden in this case. The contract provided that in the event of a default the “deposit and the Extension Fee (but only to the extent the same shall have been then deposited with Escrow Agent)…
Previewing 3 of 80 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Gory Roofing Tile Mfg., Inc. v. Davison, 191 So. 2d 40 (Fla. 1966)
- Visingardi v. Tirone, 193 So. 2d 601 (Fla. 1966)
- Mejiah v. Olivio Rodriguez & Integon Indem. Corp., 342 So. 2d 1066 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977)
- Westchester Fire Ins. Co. v. In-Sink-Erator, 252 So. 2d 856 (Fla. 4th DCA 1971)
- Commercial Trading Co., Inc. v. Zero Food Storage, Inc., 199 So. 2d 109 (Fla. 3d DCA 1967)