WILLIAM LEVIN, APPELLANT,
v.
ROBERT RONALD ROSENBLUM, 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 appellate court affirmed a summary judgment in favor of a doctor in a malpractice and assault and battery case, finding no genuine issue of material fact existed.
No, the appellate court found that no genuine issue of material fact existed, and summary judgment was appropriate.
“We have examined the pleadings, depositions, affidavits and exhibits on file and conclude, as did the able trial judge, that no genuine issue of material fact exists that would warrant this case being presented to a jury.”
Establishes the court's agreement with the trial court's finding of no genuine issue of material fact.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceA former patient sued his doctor for malpractice and assault and battery. The trial court granted summary judgment for the doctor based on the pleadin…
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 Malpractice cases and more on FLexlaw
A review of an adverse summary judgment in a malpractice and assault and battery action is sought by a former patient of the appellee.
The summary judgment rendered was based upon the pleadings, depositions, affidavits and exhibits on file in the cause.
The appellant contends there was a genuine issue as to certain material facts which precluded the rendition of a summary judgment. We have examined the pleadings, depositions, affidavits and exhibits on file and conclude, as did the able trial judge, that no genuine issue of material fact exists that would warrant this case being presented to a jury. We are aware of the numerous authorities to the effect that a jury trial should not be denied a litigant where a genuine issue as to a material fact exists, but conversely we are likewise conversant with those decisions which hold that summary judgment is proper in those instances where the pleadings, depositions, affidavits and exhibits on file in the cause fail to demonstrate that there is any triable issue of fact. This case falls in the latter category.
, Accordingly, the summary judgment appealed is affirmed..
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Lane v. Cohen, 201 So. 2d 804 (Fla. 3d DCA 1967)…e was evidence that the operation was not an unqualified success. Inasmuch as physicians are not insurers of the success of their treatment, this fact did not create an issue on the charge of medical negligence. See Levin v. Rosenblum, Fla.App.1961, 133 So. 2d 577. It is suggested that the doctor orally guaranteed the success of the operation. The pleadings do not present such an issue. See Deauville Operating Corp. v. Town and Beach Pl. Co., Fla.App.1960, 123 So. 2d 353. Affirmed.…
-
Diaz v. Manrique, 592 So. 2d 792 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992)…PER CURIAM. Affirmed. Fonts v. Household Finance Corporation, 75 So. 2d 772 (Fla.1954); Lev [*793] in v. Rosenblum, 133 So. 2d 577 (Fla. 3d DCA 1961).…
-
D J B Rentals, LLC v. City of Largo (Fla. 2d DCA 2023)…v. Zenith Radio Corp., 475 U.S. 574, 586 (1986)). Because DJB failed to show that there was an issue of fact regarding a material issue as framed by the operative pleadings, summary judgment in favor of the City was proper. See Levin v. Rosenblum, 133 So. 2d 577, 577 (Fla. 3d DCA 1961) ("[S]ummary judgment is proper in those instances where the pleadings, depositions, affidavits and exhibits on file in the cause fail to demonstrate that there is any triable issue of fact."). Affirmed. VILLANTI, J., Concurs.…