L & S FOOD SERVICES, INC., A FLORIDA CORPORATION, PETER W. SCHOEN AND RUTH L. DADY, APPELLANTS,
v.
ROBERTS CAFETERIA, INC., WILLIAM ROBERTS AND VIRGINIA ROBERTS, APPELLEES

Fla. 2d DCA | 1982-10-15
No. 82-206
HOBSON, A.C.J., and DANAHY, J., concur.
422 So. 2d 45 Florida District Court of Appeal, Second District (1982) Caution
Cited by 7 cases
Opinion of the Court
RYDER, Judge.

RYDER, Judge.

We reverse the final order in favor of appellee Roberts Cafeteria, Inc. on its claim for default of a promissory note, noting that the trial judge weighed the evidence in granting summary judgment. We hold that there did exist issues of material fact for consideration by the factfinder, and thus summary judgment was improper. Davis v. Hathaway, 408 So. 2d 688 (Fla. 2d DCA 1982). We note also that the issue of fraud, raised by appellants as a defense and counterclaim, is usually considered a jury question and is not ordinarily appropriate for summary judgment proceedings. Levey v. Getelman, 408 So. 2d 663 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981).

REVERSED and REMANDED for further proceedings.

HOBSON, A.C.J., and DANAHY, J., concur.

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Citator

Cited By

  • Nisa Vichaikul v. S.C.A.C. Enters., Inc., 616 So. 2d 100 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993)
    …ideration is a defense to the contract. Howdeskell v. First National Bank of Clearwater, 369 So. 2d 432 (Fla. 2d DCA 1979). The affirmative defense of fraud is usually considered a jury question. L & S Food Services, Inc. v. Roberts Cafeteria, Inc., 422 So. 2d 45 (Fla. 2d DCA 1982). There remains a factual dispute as to whether Vichaikul’s agents relied upon the advertisement in advising her to enter into the contract in dispute. Reversed and remanded for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.…
  • ST. Clair v. Smith, 445 So. 2d 1113 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984)
    …hen it is shown that there are no genuine issues of material fact presented in the pleadings and other evidence before the trial court, and the mov-ant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. L & S Food Services, Inc. v. Roberts Cafeteria, Inc., 422 So. 2d 45 (Fla. 2d DCA 1982); Monroe v. Appelton, 419 So. 2d 356 (Fla. 2d DCA 1982); Burkett v. Parker, 410 So. 2d 947 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982). The Smiths have not carried the burden which would support summary judgment. REVERSED and REMANDED for further procee…
  • Peterson v. Affordable Homes OF Palm Beach, Inc., 65 So. 3d 112 (Fla. 4th DCA 2011)
    …. 2d DCA 1998). “[T]he issue of fraud, raised by appellants as a defense and counterclaim, is usually considered a jury question and is not ordinarily appropriate for summary judgment proceedings.” L & S Food Servs., Inc. v. Roberts Cafeteria, Inc., 422 So. 2d 45, 45 (Fla. 2d DCA 1982). See also Millennium Group I, L.L.C. v. Attorneys Title Ins. Fund, Inc., 847 So. 2d 1115, 1117 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003) (stating that when summary judgment is granted for one party and a counterclaim on an original claim remains pe…

Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw