RAUL DISTRIBUTORS, INC., APPELLANT,
v.
FAST AIR CARRIER, LTD., APPELLEE

Fla. 3d DCA | 1984-05-29
No. 84-80
Before BASKIN, DANIEL S. PEARSON and FERGUSON, JJ.
450 So. 2d 598 Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (1984) Positive Treatment
Cited by 6 cases
Topics
Burden Of Proof In Summary Judgment Summary Judgment Standard Burden Of Proof Summary Judgment

Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Burden Of Proof In Summary Judgment cases and more on FLexlaw

Opinion of the Court
BASKIN, Judge.

BASKIN, Judge.

Raul Distributors, Inc. (Raul) appeals the entry of final summary judgment in favor of Fast Air Carrier, Ltd. We reverse.

It is axiomatic that summary judgment is inappropriate where the record reflects the existence of conflicting issues of material fact. Holl v. Talcott, 191 So. 2d 40 (Fla.1966); Levey v. Getelman, 408 So. 2d 663 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981). Additionally, the burden is on the party moving for summary judgment to prove the non-existence of any genuine issue of material fact. Holl v. Talcott; Stringfellow v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Co., 295 So. 2d 686 (Fla. 2d DCA 1974). The record under consideration discloses the existence of unresolved issues of material fact as to whether Raul acted as the shipper in the subject transaction and whether Fast Air received payment in full for carriage of the goods. Finding, therefore, that Fast Air failed to meet its burden and that the trial court erred in entering summary final judgment in favor of Fast Air, we reverse and remand the cause to the trial court for further proceedings.

Reversed and remanded.

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Citator

Cited By

  • Avva-Bc, LLC v. Amiel, 25 So. 3d 7 (Fla. 3d DCA 2009)
    …dgment as a matter of law.”); Martin v. Adorno & Yoss, L.L.P., 983 So. 2d 744, 745 (Fla. 3d DCA 2008) (finding summary judgment was inappropriate where issues of material fact remained to be resolved); Raul Distribs., Inc. v. Fast Air Carrier, Ltd., 450 So. 2d 598, 599 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984) (“It is axiomatic that summary judgment is inappropriate where the record reflects the existence of conflicting issues of material fact.”). AWA claims that, while it did not secure the landlord's written approval to assign it…
  • William N. Avera, William N. Avera, P.A. v. Provident Sec. Life Ins. Co., 512 So. 2d 292 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987)
    …of the agreement is disputed by the parties, and the record contains insufficient evidence to resolve this disputed fact, summary judgment is improper. See Holl v. Talcott, 191 So. 2d 40 (Fla.1966); Raul Distributors, Inc. v. Fast Air Carrier, Ltd., 450 So. 2d 598 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984); Levey v. Getelman; Graham v. First Marion Bank, 237 So. 2d 793 (Fla. 1st DCA 1970). In light of the unresolved issues of material fact in this cause, we reverse and remand to the trial court for further proceedings. REVERSED and…
  • Greater Miami Marine Ass'n, Inc. v. Positive Results, Inc., 618 So. 2d 372 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993)
    …it was not shown, conclusively, that there were no genuine issues of material fact, the defendant’s motion for summary judgment should have been denied. See Holl v. Talcott, 191 So. 2d 40 (Fla.1966), Raul Distributors, Inc. v. Fast Air Carrier Ltd., 450 So. 2d 598 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984); Stringfellow v. State Farm Fire & Cas. Co., 295 So. 2d 686 (Fla. 2d DCA 1974). The plaintiff’s affidavits, and the minutes of a corporate meeting where the defendant was in attendance, create an ambiguity as to what was intended…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw