ESTELLE VILA AND CARLOS VILA, HER HUSBAND, APPELLANTS,
v.
THE B. F. GOODRICH COMPANY, A FOREIGN CORPORATION ET AL., APPELLEES
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.
The court held that a partial summary judgment on some claims is not appealable if other claims based on the same facts remain. It also held that summary judgment was improperly granted when factual issues remained.
Plaintiffs sued multiple defendants, including Ford Motor Company, on various theories of liability. The trial court granted partial summary judgment …
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 Breach Of Express Warranty cases and more on FLexlaw
SCHWARTZ, Judge.
The summary final judgment entered below in favor of the defendants, B. F. Goodrich Co. and Norton Tire Co., which is on appeal in case no. 78-2307, is reversed. Not only did the movants fail affirmatively and conclusively to establish the absence of liability as a matter of law, but the expert affidavit submitted in opposition to the motion demonstrated the existence of unresolved issues of material fact. Holl v. Talcott, 191 so.2d 40 (Fla.1966); see Wills v. Sears, Roebuck & Co., 351 So. 2d 29 (Fla.1977); Visingardi v. Tirone, 193 So. 2d 601 (Fla.1966).
In case no. 78-2308, the plaintiffs seek review of a “partial final summary judgment” in favor of a co-defendant, Ford Motor Company. The order in question granted summary relief only as to the claims of strict liability and breach of implied and express warranty, which constituted some, but not all, of the theories of liability asserted against Ford; the court specifically reserved ruling on-the negligence count. Since all the counts were based on the same factual circumstances, those disposed of are not separable and distinct from the one which remains. Hence, the order in question is not appealable and case no. 78-2308 is dismissed. McClain Construction Corp. v. Roberts, 351 So. 2d 399 (Fla. 2d DCA 1977); Venezia A., Inc. v. Askew, 314 So. 2d 254 (Fla. 1st DCA 1975), cert. denied, 333 So. 2d 465 (Fla.1976); see Mendez v. West Flagler Family Association, Inc., 303 So. 2d 1 (Fla.1974).1
Reversed and remanded; appeal dismissed.
. Because the rulings contained in the Ford Motor Company order are not final and are therefore subject to subsequent reconsideration in the trial court, we observe, by way of dic-turn, that the materials presented in support of and in opposition to Ford’s motion for summary judgment were similar to those involved as to B. F. Goodrich and Norton Tire.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Miami-Dade Water & Sewer Auth. v. Metro. Dade Cnty. & City of Miami, 469 So. 2d 813 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985)…in the lawsuit to litigate the pending claims for various forms of legal and equitable relief emanating from the abolition of WASA. Accord [*815] ingly, the order in question is not appeala-ble and is hereby dismissed. See Vila v. B.F. Goodrich Co., 383 So. 2d 766 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980); McClain Construction Corp. v. Roberts, 351 So. 2d 399 (Fla. 2d DCA 1977). Appeal dismissed.…
-
Whittington v. Withers Transfer & Storage OF Coral Cables, Inc., 391 So. 2d 275 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980)…URIAM. We reverse the summary final judgment rendered adverse to plaintiff below, for defendant’s failure to conclusively negative legal liability, and its inability to demonstrate the absence of material factual issues. Vila v. B.F. Goodrich Co., 383 So. 2d 766 (Fla.3d DCA 1980). A showing that the defendant’s employees are instructed to be courteous and polite does not obviate plaintiff’s claim that the alleged tortious behavior was conducted in the course and scope of their employment. Reversed..…
-
Adjiman v. Dario Adjiman, 863 So. 2d 488 (Fla. 3d DCA 2004)…ration claim seeking the same relief remains pending in the trial court, the order striking the seatbelt theory of relief is not subject to review at this time. Mendez v. West Flagler Family Ass’n, 303 So. 2d 1 (Fla.1974); Vila v. B.F. Goodrich Co., 383 So. 2d 766 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980). Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed entirely without prejudice to appropriate appellate review of the issue presented on appeal from a reviewable final judgment. Appeal dismissed. . This theory was, in turn, founded on du…
Authorities Cited
- Mendez v. W. Flagler Fam. Ass'n, Inc., 303 So. 2d 1 (Fla. 1974)
- Wills v. Sears, 351 So. 2d 29 (Fla. 1977)
- Visingardi v. Tirone, 193 So. 2d 601 (Fla. 1966)
- Venezia A., Inc. v. Reubin O'Donovan Askew, 314 So. 2d 254 (Fla. 1st DCA 1975)
- McCLAIN Constr. Corp. v. Roberts, 351 So. 2d 399 (Fla. 2d DCA 1977)