JONES CONSTRUCTION COMPANY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA, INC., APPELLANT,
v.
FLORIDA WORKERS' COMPENSATION JUA, INC., 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.
Florida Workers' Compensation JUA, Inc. sought summary judgment against Jones Construction Company for unpaid workers' compensation insurance premiums totaling over $3 million. The appellate court reversed the trial court's grant of summary judgment, holding that FWCJUA failed to meet its burden of demonstrating the absence of a genuine issue of material fact because its supporting affidavit contained only conclusory statements rather than admissible evidentiary facts.
No. FWCJUA did not satisfy its burden because its supporting affidavit contained only conclusory statements of ultimate fact rather than admissible evidentiary facts as required by Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.510(e).
[1] A party moving for summary judgment bears the initial burden of demonstrating the absence of a genuine issue of material fact and entitlement to judgment as a matter of l…
[2] An affidavit supporting a motion for summary judgment must set forth evidentiary facts admissible in evidence and cannot be based upon factual conclusions or conclusions…
Previewing 2 of 4 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“The party moving for summary judgment carries the initial burden of establishing the absence of any genuine issue of material fact and entitlement to judgment as a matter of law”
Establishes the legal standard for summary judgment motions and identifies which party bears the burden of proof
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceFWCJUA filed a complaint against Jones Construction alleging Jones owed $3,010,834 in additional workers' compensation insurance premiums. FWCJUA move…
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
FULMER, Judge.
Insurance carrier Florida Workers’ Compensation JUA, Inc., (“FWCJUA”) filed a complaint against Jones Construction Company of Central Florida, Inc. alleging that Jones owed FWCJUA the sum of $3,010,834 in additional workers’ compensation insurance premiums. The trial court granted summary judgment for FWCJUA. We reverse because, in moving for summary judgment, FWCJUA did not carry its burden of demonstrating the absence of a genuine issue of material fact.
The party moving for summary judgment carries the initial burden of establishing the absence of any genuine issue of material fact and entitlement to judgment as a matter of law, and there is no duty on the party moved against to demonstrate the existence of such issue until after the movant has satisfied his initial burden.1 See Hurricane Boats, Inc. v. Certified Indus. Fabricators, Inc., 246 So. 2d 174, 175 (Fla. 3d DCA 1971). “The affidavit in support of summary judgment may not be based upon factual conclusions or conclusions of law.” Id.
FWCJUA’s motion for summary judgment was accompanied by an affidavit of its Program Manager attesting that he had personal knowledge of the facts, that the allegations in the complaint were true and correct, and that Jones owed FWCJUA the principal sum of $3,671,312 for unpaid workers’ compensation premiums. This affidavit does not set forth any evidentiary facts that would be admissible in evidence as required by Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.510(e). Thus, the disparity between the amount alleged to be owed in the complaint and the increased amount alleged in the affidavit, and, in fact, awarded by the trial court, is both unexplained and devoid of evidentiary support. Because the affidavit contains only conclusory statements of ultimate fact, it is insufficient to sustain the movant’s burden of demonstrating the absence of any genuine issue of material fact. See Dean v. Gold Coast Theatres, Inc., 156 So. 2d 546, 549 (Fla. 2d DCA 1963); Nour v. All State Pipe Supply Co., 487 So. 2d 1204, 1205 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986); Hurricane Boats, 246 So. 2d at 175. Thus, in the face of Jones’s answer denying the allegations of the complaint, the trial court erred in granting the motion for summary judgment.
Accordingly, we reverse the judgment and remand for further proceedings.
PARKER, A.C.J., and CASANUEVA, J., concur. . Because we conclude that FWCJUA's affidavit was insufficient, we need not address the deficiencies in Jones’s affidavit in opposition to the motion for summary judgment. See Hour v. All State Pipe Supply Co., 487 So. 2d 1204, 1205 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Fla. Dep't of Fin. Servs. v. Associated Indus. Ins. Co., Inc., 868 So. 2d 600 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004)…t affidavits to be supplemented or opposed by ... further affidavits.” An affidavit in support of summary judgment may not be based on factual conclusions or conclusions of law. Jones Constr. Co. of Cent. Fla., Inc. v. Fla. Workers’ Comp. Jua, Inc., 793 So. 2d 978, 979 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001). “The purpose of the personal knowledge requirement is to prevent the trial court from relying on hearsay when ruling on a motion for summary judgment ... and to ensure that there is an admissible eviden-tiary basis for the c…
-
Lane A. Houk v. Pennymac Corp., 210 So. 3d 726 (Fla. 2d DCA 2017)…rtgage had “transferred all rights in the note and mortgage to PennyMae Corp.” This conclusory statement was insufficient to sustain Penny-Mac’s burden for summary judgment. See Jones Constr. Co. of Cent. Fla., Inc. v. Fla. Workers’ Comp. JUA, Inc., 793 So. 2d 978, 980 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001) (holding that an affidavit containing “only conclusory statements of ultimate fact [was] insufficient to sustain the movant’s burden of demonstrating the absence of any genuine issue of material fact”); Seinfeld v. Commercial…
-
Smith v. Frontier Commc'ns Int'l, Inc., 805 So. 2d 975 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001)…00). Until the party seeking entry of a summary judgment meets its burden, there is no duty on the other party to demonstrate the existence of a genuine issue of material fact. Jones Const. Co. of Central Fla., Inc. v. Fla. Workers’ Comp. JUA, Inc., 793 So. 2d 978, 979 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001). On appeal, the standard of review of a summary judgment order is de novo. Volusia County, 760 So. 2d at 130. Where the interpretation or construction of a written instrument and the legal effect to be drawn from the instrum…
Previewing 3 of 7 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Hurricane Boats, Inc. v. Certified Indus. Fabricators, Inc., 246 So. 2d 174 (Fla. 3d DCA 1971)
- Jacksonville Terminal Co. v. Smith, 156 So. 2d 546 (Fla. 1st DCA 1963)
- Justina Dean v. Gold Coast Theatres, Inc., 156 So. 2d 546 (Fla. 2d DCA 1963)
- Nour v. ALL State Pipe Supply Co., 487 So. 2d 1204 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986)