LESLIE DAEDA, APPELLANT,
v.
BLUE CROSS & BLUE SHIELD OF FLORIDA, INC., A CORPORATION, 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.
Leslie Daeda appealed a summary judgment declaring her health insurance policy void and awarding Blue Cross damages. The court reversed, finding the trial court improperly considered unauthenticated evidence (a social security disability application) that would be inadmissible at trial, leaving material factual issues unresolved.
The trial court erred in granting summary judgment because it considered unauthenticated material that would be inadmissible at trial. Without this improperly considered evidence, a material issue of fact remained, precluding summary judgment as a matter of law.
[1] A motion for summary judgment requires that the pleadings, depositions, answers to interrogatories, admissions on file, and affidavits, if any, show no genuine issue as t…
[2] The burden is on the party moving for summary judgment to demonstrate conclusively that the nonmoving party cannot prevail.
Previewing 2 of 6 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“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.”
Establishes the legal standard for summary judgment under Florida Rules of Civil Procedure
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceDaeda purchased a health insurance policy from Blue Cross and subsequently filed an action for breach of that policy. Blue Cross answered and filed a …
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 Authentication Of Documents cases and more on FLexlaw
SCHOONOVER, Acting Chief Judge.
The appellant, Leslie Daeda, challenges a final summary judgment in favor of the appellee, Blue Cross & Blue Shield of Florida, Inc. We find that the trial court erred in granting a summary judgment and, accordingly, reverse and remand for further proceedings.
The instant action was commenced when the appellant filed an action against the appellee seeking damages for the alleged breach of a health insurance policy she had purchased from the appellee. The appellee answered the complaint and filed a two count counterclaim seeking to have the policy declared void ab initio and requesting damages in connection with the benefits it had paid under the policy.
The appellee moved for a summary judgment which was granted. The trial court entered a final judgment declaring the policy void ab initio and awarding the appellee damages (the amount of medical claims paid by the appellee) in the amount of $70,323.79 plus interest. 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). The burden is on the movant to demonstrate conclusively that the nonmoving party cannot prevail. Gomes v. Stevens, 548 So. 2d 1163 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989); 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 raises even the slightest doubt that an issue might exist, summary judgment is improper. In this case, based upon the evidence properly considered by the trial court, the appellee did not carry its burden and, accordingly, the matter must be reversed and remanded for further proceedings. Gomes, 548 So. 2d at 1164.
We realize the value of summary judgment procedures in expediting the disposition of cases and in disposing of those matters where the material facts are not in conflict. Under our rules of civil procedure, however, only competent evidence may be considered by the court in ruling upon a motion for summary judgment, and in this case certain material furnished to the trial court was not competent. Halavin v. Tamiami Trail Tours, Inc., 124 So. 2d 746 (Fla. 1st DCA 1960).
After the appellee filed its motion for summary judgment it filed a memorandum in support of the motion. Attached to the memorandum was documentation including an application for social security disability benefits which had been filed by the appellant. Although these documents indicate that the appellee might be entitled to summary judgment, it is not necessary for us to decide that question because the material was not properly authenticated and without it a material issue of fact remains to be decided. See Tunnell v. Hicks, 574 So. 2d 264 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991).
The documentation concerning the appellant’s social security disability claim would not be admissible at trial because it was not properly authenticated. Therefore, the trial court could not properly consider that information in deciding a motion for summary judgment. In re Crosley, 384 So .2d 274 (Fla. 4th DCA 1980). See also Jackson v. Stelco Employees’ Credit Union, Ltd., 178 So. 2d 58 (Fla. 2d DCA 1965). Without that information, a question concerning a material issue of fact remains, and we, accordingly, reverse and remand for proceedings consistent herewith. Reversed and remanded with instructions.
THREADGILL and PATTERSON, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (14 total)
-
Bryson v. Branch Banking & Tr. Co., 75 So. 3d 783 (Fla. 2d DCA 2011)…es of default letters purportedly sent to Bryson by BB & T were insufficient for summary judgment purposes because only competent evidence may be considered in ruling on a motion for summary judgment. Daeda v. Blue Cross & Blue Shield of Fla., Inc., 698 So. 2d 617, 618 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997); Tunnell v. Hicks, 574 So. 2d 264, 266 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991) (explaining that court could not consider certain documents in its summary judgment decision because “Tunnell failed to attach either document to affidavits that pres…
-
Stop & Shoppe Mart, Inc. v. Zahra Mehdi, 854 So. 2d 784 (Fla. 5th DCA 2003)…The simple allegation of “willfulness” in the unsworn complaint was insufficient to overcome the denial in the answer. See, e.g., Feinman v. City of Jacksonville, 356 So. 2d 50 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978); Daeda v. Blue Cross & Blue Shield of Florida, Inc., 698 So. 2d 617 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997) (only competent evidence may be considered when ruling on summary judgment motion). The circuit court departed from the essential requirements of law when it failed to reverse the county court judgment that ignored Stop & Shoppe’s…
-
Gidwani v. Roberts, 248 So. 3d 203 (Fla. 3d DCA 2018)
Previewing 3 of 14 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Gory Roofing Tile Mfg., Inc. v. Davison, 191 So. 2d 40 (Fla. 1966)
- Gomes v. Stevens, 548 So. 2d 1163 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989)
- 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)
- Halavin v. Tamiami Trail Tours, Inc., 124 So. 2d 746 (Fla. 1st DCA 1960)
- Detzner v. Tallahassee-Leon Cnty. Planning Comm'n & the City Comm'n of the City of Tallahassee, 574 So. 2d 264 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991)
- In re Est. of Marguerite Crosley, 384 So. 2d 274 (Fla. 4th DCA 1980)
- Tunnell v. Hicks, 574 So. 2d 264 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991)
- Jackson v. Stelco Emps'. Credit Union, 178 So. 2d 58 (Fla. 2d DCA 1965)