OGDEN TRUCKING COMPANY, APPELLANT,
v.
HELLER BROS. & CO., 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.
The court held that a final judgment entered after a non-jury trial on damages, based on a motion for final judgment and an affidavit, was improper when a jury trial had been demanded.
A trucking company was sued for conversion. A partial summary judgment on liability was entered, but not appealed. The plaintiff later moved for a fin…
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 Motion For Final Judgment cases and more on FLexlaw
The appellant, a trucking company, was defendant in a suit for conversion of a truckload of potatoes, which it was under contract to transport from Goulds, Florida to New York City. A jury trial was demanded. A partial summary judgment, holding the appellant liable, was entered. The appellee has urged that this last mentioned judgment is not now reviewable because it was in itself appealable. It has been previously determined that such judgments are interlocutory in character and not appealable, and that they may be assigned as error upon an appeal from the final judgment. Rule 1.36(c), Florida Rules of Civil Procedure, 30 F.S.A.; Brannon v. Johnston, Fla.1955, 83 So.2d 779. Nevertheless, we canot review the propriety of the partial summary judgment because its entry was not assigned as error. St. Andrews Bay Lumber Co. v. Bernard, 106 Fla. 235, 143 So. 160; Davidson v. Bezant, 101 Fla. 1296, 132 So. 488.
Approximately one year after the date of the partial summary judgment on liability the plaintiff served and filed a motion, “for final judgment”. This motion reads as follows:
“The plaintiff, Heller Bros. & Co., moves the court to enter a final judgment assessing damages in the above entitled matter, and in support of its motion attaches the affidavit of Milton Heller, as plaintiff’s Exhibit ‘A’, and by reference thereto made a part of this motion.”
Thereafter the court granted the above motion and a final judgment was entered. It is from this final judgment that the defendant appeals.
The judgment recites as follows:
“This Cause came on to be heard on the plaintiff’s Motion for entry of Final Judgment, the court having heard testimony on the issue of damages and having examined the testimony on file in this cause, and being otherwise duly and fully advised in the premises, it is hereby (Emphasis added).
« * sjs * a
It thus appears that a non-jury trial was had upon the issue of damages. Appellee *297explains the holding of such a trial, when a jury trial had been demanded upon all the issues of the cause, by the contention that the final judgment was in truth a summary final judgment on the remaining issue of damage to the plaintiff. This position is unavailing for several reasons. First, the plaintiff did not move for a summary judgment on damages, but moved for a final judgment on the basis of an affidavit, a procedure which is not permissible in a litigated cause. Second, Florida Rules of Civil Procedure do not permit the taking of testimony at a hearing on a motion for summary judgment because Rule 1.36(c), 30 F.S.A., provides as follows: “The judgment or decree sought shall be rendered forthwith if the pleadings, depositions 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 or decree as a matter of law.” 1
For the reasons expressed the final judgment is reversed and the cause is remanded for a jury trial on the issue of damages.
Reversed and remanded.
HORTON, C. J., and CARROLL, CHAS., J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Hall v. Davis, 106 So. 2d 599 (Fla. 1st DCA 1958)
- Brannon v. Johnston, 83 So. 2d 779 (Fla. 1955)
- Fish Carburetor Corp. v. Great Am. Ins. Co., 125 So. 2d 889 (Fla. 1st DCA 1961)
- Davidson v. Bezant, 132 So. 488 (Fla. 1931)
- St. Andrews Bay Lumber Co. v. Bernard, 106 Fla. 235 (Fla. 1932)