POMARS
v.
SPIRT
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.
The court held that the plaintiff's actions in discovery waived the Dead Man's Statute, allowing the defendant to testify and creating a fact issue that precluded summary judgment.
The estate of Harold Dwork sued Irene Spirt regarding a promissory note signed by the decedent as an accommodation party. The plaintiff engaged in dis…
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 Dead Man'S Statute cases and more on FLexlaw
This is a complaint by the estate of Harold Dwork, deceased, against Irene Spirt, in which the plaintiff executor claims that he was required to make good a promissory note which was executed by defendant, and signed by the decedent as an accommodating party.
Plaintiff has attached the note in question to his complaint and has made certain requests for admissions with respect to this note. Further, plaintiff has submitted certain interrogatories with respect to this note and has deposed defendant with respect to same. (However, the deposition has not been offered into evidence.)
By plaintiff’s actions, above described, he has in effect waived the Dead Man’s Statute, §90.05, Florida Statutes, and defendant may testify as to a transaction or communication with the deceased with respect to the note in question. See Small v. Shure, 94 So.2d 371; Sessions v. Summers, 177 So.2d 720; Herring v. Eiland, 81 So.2d 645; and Booth v. Cureton, 81 So.2d 662.
When defendant’s testimony or affidavit is thus considered, an issue of fact exists. Plaintiff’s motion for a summary judgment is therefore denied.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Herring v. Wilber T. Eiland, 81 So. 2d 645 (Fla. 1955)
- Small v. Rose Shure by her Conservator City Nat'l Bank & Tr. Co. of Chicago, 94 So. 2d 371 (Fla. 1957)
- Sessions v. Summers, 177 So. 2d 720 (Fla. 1st DCA 1965)
- Booth v. Cureton, 81 So. 2d 662 (Fla. 1955)