ROBERT LEE ANDERSON, APPELLANT,
v.
JERRY'S CRYSTAL BAR, INC., A FLORIDA CORPORATION, APPELLEE

Fla. 2d DCA | 1996-06-07
No. 95-03636
CAMPBELL, A.C.J., and FRANK, J., concur.
681 So. 2d 742 Florida District Court of Appeal, Second District (1996)

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

The court held that disputed factual issues exist, precluding summary judgment.


Facts & Procedural History

Plaintiff Anderson sued Jerry's Crystal Bar for negligence. The trial court granted summary judgment based on Anderson's interrogatory answer, but And…

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
BLUE, Judge.

BLUE, Judge.

Robert Lee Anderson seeks review of the final summary judgment entered in favor of Jerry’s Crystal Bar, Inc. We conclude that disputed factual issues exist so as to preclude the entry of summary judgment, and therefore, we reverse.

Anderson’s complaint alleged injuries arising from Jerry’s Crystal Bar’s negligence. The court based summary judgment on Anderson’s answer to interrogatory # 4, which called for Anderson’s description of the bar’s negligence. In opposition to the motion for summary judgment, Anderson filed an affidavit that contained details not included in the interrogatory answer, which conformed to the allegations in the complaint. The affidavit was not stricken by the trial court.

The affidavit does not necessarily alter or controvert Anderson’s answer; however, it does create a factual question. See Arnold v. Dollar Gen. Corp., 632 So. 2d 1144 (Fla. 5th DCA 1994). The interrogatory answer may require explanation and prove harmful to Anderson’s ease at trial, but it does not rise to the level of an irrefutable admission. Because the information in the answer to interrogatory #4 does not resolve the disputed facts, the entry of summary judgment was erroneous.

Accordingly, we reverse the final summary judgment and remand for further proceedings.

CAMPBELL, A.C.J., and FRANK, J., concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw