PAUL R. KICKLITER, APPELLANT,
v.
JAMES REALE AND EDWARD BERGIN, 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 the moving party failed to demonstrate the absence of genuine issues of material fact, making summary judgment improper.
Plaintiffs filed a multicount complaint seeking damages for breach of a real estate listing agreement. After pretrial proceedings, the trial court ent…
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 Burden Of Proof In Summary Judgment cases and more on FLexlaw
SCHOONOVER, Acting Chief Judge.
The appellant, Paul R. Kickliter, challenges a final summary judgment entered in an action on a real estate brokerage listing agreement. We reverse.
James Reale and Edward Bergin filed a multicount complaint seeking damages for the breach of a real estate listing agreement. The appellant filed an answer which included twenty-two affirmative defenses. After lengthy pretrial proceedings, the trial court entered a final summary judgment in favor of James Reale and against the appellant on counts III and IV of the second amended complaint. This timely appeal followed.
A motion for summary judgment may only be granted if the pleadings, depositions, answers 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. Fla.R.Civ.P. 1.510(c). Furthermore, the burden is on the party moving for a summary judgment to demonstrate conclusively that the nonmoving party cannot prevail. Snyder v. Cheezem 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 exist, summary judgment is improper. Snyder. See also Moore v. Morris, 475 So. 2d 666 (Fla.1985). In this case, Mr. Reale did not carry his burden, and several issues of material fact remain to be decided by the trier of fact in connection with both count III and count IV of the second amended complaint.
We, accordingly, reverse the final summary judgment and remand for proceedings consistent herewith.
HALL and ALTENBERND, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Sharon v. State Farm Fire & Cas. Co., 586 So. 2d 59 (Fla. 1991)…PER CURIAM. We have for review Sharon v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Co., 561 So. 2d 302 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990), in which the Second District Court of Appeal affirmed the entry of summary judgment on the authority of Brixius v. Allstate Insurance Co., 549 So. 2d 1191 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989), and certified its decision as in conflict with Jerniga…
Authorities Cited
- Gory Roofing Tile Mfg., Inc. v. Davison, 191 So. 2d 40 (Fla. 1966)
- Moore v. Morris, 475 So. 2d 666 (Fla. 1985)
- Watkins DRY Wall, Inc. v. Drummond Court Corp., 373 So. 2d 719 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979)
- Snyder v. Cheezem Dev. Corp., 373 So. 2d 719 (Fla. 2d DCA 1979)