VIRGIL DEAN ST. PIERRE, APPELLANT,
v.
UNITED PACIFIC LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, APPELLEE
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 improperly granted because genuine issues of material fact remain regarding the insurance agent's relationship to the parties.
The appellee insurance company filed a complaint against the appellant. After pretrial proceedings, the trial court entered a final summary judgment i…
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, Judge.
The appellant, Virgil Dean St. Pierre, challenges a final summary judgment entered against him and in favor of the appel-lee, United Pacific Life Insurance Company. We reverse.
The appellee filed a multicount complaint against the appellant seeking damages because of the actions of an insurance agent named Hamilton. After lengthy pretrial proceedings, the trial court entered a final summary judgment in favor of the appellee and 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, as in this case, 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, the appellee did not carry its burden and issues of material fact concerning Hamilton’s relationship to the parties remain to be decided by the trier of fact.
We, accordingly, reverse the final summary judgment and remand for proceedings consistent herewith.
CAMPBELL, A.C.J., and QUINCE, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
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)