ECO-TRADITION, LLC, ECO-LUBE OF JUPITER F/K/A ECO-LUBE CORPORATION, ECO-LUBE OF TRADITION, INC., ECO-JUPITER, LLC, AND DAVID M. DONAN, INDIVIDUALLY, APPELLANTS,
v.
PENNZOIL-QUAKER STATE COMPANY F/K/A PENNZOIL LUBE CENTER ACCEPTANCE 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.
Eco-Tradition appeals a trial court's grant of partial summary judgment in favor of Pennzoil, which sought injunctive relief to inspect property secured by a mortgage. The Fourth District reversed, holding that summary judgment was improper because Pennzoil failed to present admissible evidence authenticating the mortgage and notes.
Summary judgment was improper because Pennzoil failed to comply with Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.510 by failing to present any affidavits, depositions, or other admissible evidence establishing the validity of the mortgage and notes. The court erred in relying solely on Pennzoil's unsworn amended complaint and unauthenticated attachments.
[1] A motion for summary judgment must be supported by evidence admissible in court, such as affidavits, depositions, or authenticated documents.
[2] Summary judgment is improper when the movant fails to present evidence establishing the validity of the underlying documents upon which the motion relies.
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“A motion for summary judgment shall "state with particularity the grounds upon which it is based and the substantial matters of law to be argued and shall specifically identify any affidavits, answers to interrogatories, admissions, depositions and other materials as would be admissible in evidence on which the movant relies."”
Establishes the procedural requirement that Pennzoil must identify specific admissible evidence supporting its summary judgment motion
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligencePennzoil sued Eco-Tradition for failure to pay debts owed under promissory notes secured by a mortgage on Eco-Tradition's property. Pennzoil moved for…
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 Summary Judgment Evidence cases and more on FLexlaw
Appellants, Eco-Tradition, LLC, Eco-Lube of Jupiter f/k/a Eco-Lube Corporation, Eco-Lube of Tradition, Inc., Eco-Jupiter, LLC and David M. Donan, (collectively “Eco-Tradition”), appeal a partial summary judgment granting injunctive relief authorizing Pennzoil to inspect land owned by Eco-Tradition. We reverse.
Pennzoil filed a lawsuit against Eco-Tradition for its failure to pay certain *496debts due to Pennzoil under the terms of several promissory notes which were secured by a mortgage that encumbered Eco-Tradition’s property.1 In its amended complaint, Pennzoil sought affirmative injunctive relief compelling Eco-Tradition to allow Pennzoil to inspect its property. The basis for the relief sought was contained in the mortgage which authorized Pennzoil to inspect the property at reasonable times.
Pursuant to Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.510, Pennzoil filed a motion for summary judgment asserting the right to inspect the land under the terms of the mortgage. In its motion, Pennzoil asserted the elements required to obtain injunctive relief. It also filed two affidavits from its inspectors to establish the need to inspect and that Eco-Tradition refused to allow the inspection. The motion was unsworn and did not contain “any affidavits, answers to interrogatories, admissions, depositions and other materials as would be admissible in evidence” establishing that the mortgage attached to the amended complaint was the mortgage alleged to have been given by Eco-Tradition. See id.
Eco-Tradition filed a motion to dismiss and response to the summary judgment. In its response, Eco-Tradition argued that the copy of the mortgage attached to the complaint could not be considered by the court because it was unauthenticated.2 The trial court granted Pennzoil’s motion for partial summary judgment and this appeal follows.
“An order granting or denying an injunction following an evidentiary hearing is normally reviewed for an abuse of discretion.” Shaw v. Tampa Elec. Co., 949 So.2d 1066, 1068 (Fla. 2d DCA 2007). However, the “ ‘standard of review governing a trial court’s ruling on a motion for summary judgment posing a pure question of law is de novo.’ ” Id. at 1069 (quoting Major League Baseball v. Morsani, 790 So.2d 1071, 1074 (Fla.2001)). Because the trial court did not conduct an evidentiary hearing but instead granted injunctive relief on a motion for summary judgment, we apply the de novo standard of review.
A motion for summary judgment shall “state with particularity the grounds upon which it is based and the substantial matters of law to be argued and shall specifically identify any affidavits, answers to interrogatories, admissions, depositions and other materials as would be admissible in evidence on which the movant relies.” Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.510. Summary judgment is improper unless the record demonstrates that there are no genuine issue as to any material fact and that the party is entitled to the judgment as a matter of law. Snyder v. Cheezem Dev. Corp., 373 So.2d 719, 720 (Fla. 2d DCA 1979). Here, Pennzoil failed to present any evidence, affidavits, depositions, or documents establishing the validity of the mortgage and notes. Accordingly, it was error for the trial judge to rely solely on Pennzoil’s un-sworn second amended complaint and unauthenticated attachments. See TRG-Brickell Point NE v. Wajsblat, 34 So.3d 53, 55 (Fla. 3d DCA 2010) (holding “it is apodictic that summary judgments may not be granted at any type of hearing, absent the existence of ‘summary judgment evidence’ in the record.”).
*497Therefore, we reverse the trial court’s order granting Pennzoil’s motion for partial summary judgment as to Count I (mandatory injunction) and remand for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.
Reversed and Remanded.
WARNER and FORST, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (14 total)
-
Fischer v. Debrincat, 169 So. 3d 1204 (Fla. 4th DCA 2015)…ermitted by law in the due course of the judicial proceedings or as necessarily preliminary thereto.” The standard of review applicable to a summary judgment posing a pure question of law is de novo. Eco-Tradition, LLC v. Pennzoil-Quaker State Co., 137 So. 3d 495, 496 (Fla. 4th DCA 2014). Malicious prosecution is a “very ancient” cause of action, one that has long been recognized by the Florida Supreme Court. See, e.g., Tatum Bros. Real Estate & Inv. Co. v. Watson, 92 Fla. 278, 288, 109 So. 623, 626 (1926).…
-
Greenspire Global, Inc. v. Sarasota Green Grp., LLC, 355 So. 3d 476 (Fla. 2d DCA 2023)…unitive damages claims. Similarly, the circuit court could not rely on the unauthenticated attachments to the unverified complaint because they, too, lacked any evidentiary weight on their own. See Eco-Tradition, LLC v. Pennzoil- Quaker State Co., 137 So. 3d 495, 496 (Fla. 4th DCA 2014) (holding that unauthenticated attachments to an unverified complaint have no evidentiary value). Second, SGG's attempt to imbue the complaint and exhibits with evidentiary import by submitting Cassidy's affidavit was ineffe…
-
ABA Interior Inc. v. THE Owen Grp. Corp., 338 So. 3d 264 (Fla. 4th DCA 2022)…subcontract by engaging properly licensed sub-subcontractors to perform the work that required Palm Beach County licensure. Such unresolved factual issues preclude the entry of summary judgment. See Eco-Tradition, LLC v. Pennzoil-Quaker State Co., 137 So. 3d 495, 496 (Fla. 4th DCA 2014) (“Summary judgment is improper unless the record demonstrates that there are no genuine issue as to any material fact and that the party is entitled to the judgment as a matter of law.”). Additionally, the trial court did n…
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
- Major League Baseball v. Morsani, 790 So. 2d 1071 (Fla. 2001)
- 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)
- Shaw v. Tampa Elec. Co., 949 So. 2d 1066 (Fla. 2d DCA 2007)
- Trg-Brickell Point NE, Ltd v. Michael and Marsha Wajsblat, 34 So. 3d 53 (Fla. 3d DCA 2010)