MARY KUCZKIR, APPELLANT,
v.
SERA MARTELL, APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Libel cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
This is a libel action. The trial court granted partial summary judgment as to liability in favor of plaintiff and against defendant. Defendant appeals. We reverse and remand.
The alleged libel hinges upon a letter written by defendant which was circulated throughout the condominium complex where the parties lived.
From a review of the record it appears that defendant wrote and published the letter containing a number of statements derogatory as to plaintiff. However, there is a classic dispute as to the truth or falsity of the statements, which dispute can only be resolved by determining the credibility of the parties; Where the issue of credibility is present, summary judgment is inappropriate. Florida East Coast Railway Company v. Metropolitan Dade County, 438 So. 2d 978 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983). Moreover, there are valid issues made by the affirmative defenses, which issues stand in the way of determining the case via summary judgment. Glickman v. Potamkin, 454 So. 2d 612 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984) rev. den. 461 So. 2d 115 (Fla.1985).
The partial summary judgment as to liability is reversed and the cause remanded for further proceedings.
Reversed and Remanded.
HERSEY, C.J., and DOWNEY and WALDEN, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Cameshia Byrd v. BT Foods, Inc., 948 So. 2d 921 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007)…ht most favorable to the non-moving party.” City of Lauderhill v. Rhames, 864 So. 2d 432, 434 n. 1 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003). Where credibility issues impact the determination of material facts, summary judgment is not appropriate. See Kuczkir v. Martell, 480 So. 2d 700 (Fla. 4th DCA 1985). Both parties have cited federal district and circuit court cases. To the extent that the federal cases permit summary judgment based on Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56 as interpreted in Celotex [*924] Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U…
-
Hernandez v. United Auto. Ins. Co., Inc., 730 So. 2d 344 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999)…ry judgment proceeding.”); Shapiro v. Barron, 538 So. 2d 1319, 1320 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989) (reasoning that “[j]udging the credibility of witnesses or weighing the evidence are not proper subjects of a motion for summary judgment.”); Kuczkir v. Martell, 480 So. 2d 700, 701 (Fla. 4th DCA 1985) (stating that “[wjhere the [*346] issue of credibility is present, summary judgment is inappropriate.”); State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Gant, 460 So. 2d 912, 913 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984) (holding that “[i]t goes without saying…
-
Whitby v. Infinity Radio Inc., 951 So. 2d 890 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007)…nity’s legitimate business interests and the broadness of the non-compete covenant is by way of testimony that necessarily gives rise to questions of credibility, determinations of which are inappropriate on summary judgment. See Kuczkir v. Martell, 480 So. 2d 700, 701 (Fla. 4th DCA 1985). Therefore, the trial court erred in granting Infinity’s motion for partial summary judgment and concluding that the non-compete covenant was enforceable, without conducting an evidentiary hearing to hear testimony and rece…
Previewing 3 of 8 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Fla. E. Coast Ry. Co. v. Metro. Dade Cnty., 438 So. 2d 978 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983)
- Glickman v. Potamkin, 454 So. 2d 612 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984)