SAM E. MURRELL, JR., APPELLANT,
v.
NCNB NATIONAL BANK OF FLORIDA, ET AL., 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.
Summary judgment was improvidently granted in a guaranty case because material factual disputes existed regarding payment and fraudulent inducement, requiring reversal and remand for trial.
Summary judgment should not have been entered where material factual issues exist regarding whether the defendant made payment and whether he was fraudulently induced to sign the guaranty.
[1] Summary judgment is improper in a guaranty case when material factual disputes exist regarding payment and fraudulent inducement.
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceA promissory note fell into default, and the bank sued the guarantor to enforce the guaranty. The guarantor alleged he made payments that the bank wro…
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 Breach Of Guaranty cases and more on FLexlaw
DAUKSCH, Judge.
This is an appeal from a summary final judgment in a promissory note guaranty case.
Appellee sued appellant after a promissory note fell into default and appellant failed to fulfill his guaranty of the note by paying it. Appellant filed an answer alleging virtually all defenses available under the common law and has raised some provisions of the Uniform Commercial Code as being applicable. Additionally, he filed a counterclaim alleging misrepresentation, breach of fiduciary duty, conversion and breach of contract.
Summary judgment was improvidently granted. It should not have been granted as to the counterclaim because there was no motion for summary judgment on the counterclaim. There were sufficient material factual issues raised concerning the main action to prevent entry of summary judgment on that suit. For example, appellant makes a defense of payment, alleging that appellee received funds for allocation to the note but wrongfully refused to apply them to the note. As a further example, appellant asserts, and a factual issue may exist, that he was fraudulently induced to sign the guaranty. A trial is necessary to establish the true facts and settle the disputed issues. The summary final judgment is reversed and this cause remanded for trial.
REVERSED and REMANDED.
HARRIS and DIAMANTIS, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Watson v. Truman Hahn, 664 So. 2d 1083 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995)…d Pest Control of Florida, Inc., 543 So. 2d 417 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989). . Bailey Drainage District v. Stark, 526 So. 2d 678 (Fla.1988); Moore v. Morris, 475 So. 2d 666 (Fla. 1985); Holl v. Talcott, 191 So. 2d 40 (Fla. 1966); Murrell v. NCNB Nat. Bank, 611 So. 2d 603 (Fla. 5th DCA 1993); Semoran Pines Condo. Assoc. . Chillemi v. Rorabeck, 629 So. 2d 206 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993); Marsella v. Crapps, 529 So. 2d 1232 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988); Universal Underwriters Ins. Co. v. Steve Hull Chevrolet, Inc., 513 So. 2d 218 (Fla…