RCA INVESTMENTS, INC., ROY C. ANDERSON, JOYCE DELISSER, AND FITZROY DELISSER, APPELLANTS,
v.
AMERIVEND, CORP., WASH BOWL, INC., AND MAYTAG CORPORATION, APPELLEES

Fla. 3d DCA | 1991-06-04
No. 91-14
Before LEVY, GERSTEN and GODERICH, JJ.
581 So. 2d 618 Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (1991) Positive Treatment
Cited by 3 cases

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.


Holding

Summary judgment was improper because genuine issues of material fact existed regarding income guaranty, marketing plan, and agency.


Facts & Procedural History

Appellants appealed a final summary judgment granted in favor of appellees. The appellate court found genuine issues of material fact that precluded s…

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.


Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

Appellants, RCA Investments, Inc., Roy C. Anderson, Joyce Delisser, and Fitzroy Delisser, appeal from a final summary judgment in favor of Amerivend, Corp., Wash Bowl, Inc., and Maytag Corporation. We reverse.

Summary judgment is proper only where “the pleadings, depositions, answers to interrogatories and admissions on file together with the 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). Holl v. Talcott, 191 So. 2d 40 (Fla.1966); Newport Seafood, Inc. v. Neptune Trading Corp., 555 So. 2d 376 (Fla.3d DCA 1989).

We find that there were genuine issues of material fact regarding: (1) whether appellees made representations to appellants which would constitute a guaranty of income; (2) whether appellees provided appellants with a marketing plan; and (3) whether Amerivend was the agent of Maytag Corporation. Accordingly, we reverse and remand for the determination of these issues of material fact.

Reversed.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Cerniglia v. Cerniglia, 655 So. 2d 172 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995)
  • Perez-Villarreal v. Federico MacIa, 648 So. 2d 802 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994)
    …o interrogatories and admissions on file together with the 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.’ ” RCA Invs., Inc. v. Amerivend Corp., 581 So. 2d 618 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991) (quoting Fla.R.Civ.P. 1.510(c)); see also, Holl v. Talcott, 191 So. 2d 40 (Fla.1966); Newport Seafood, Inc. v. Neptune Trading Corp., 555 So. 2d 376 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989). After reviewing the record, we find that genuine issues of…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw